But thats what this fuss is all about, cable and torque.Sounds like a typical high-end audio voodoo...
But thats what this fuss is all about, cable and torque.Sounds like a typical high-end audio voodoo...
I can imagine missing the sealant on both speakers if they are being manufactured in pairs, and the manufacturing flow calls for putting the sealant on both pairs in the same step. Maybe he stepped outside and had a beer right before the sealing step and forgot!Sample B also had the binding post exposed.
Alan claims this was a QC mistake, but if so, did he 'mistake' the QC of two speakers in a row?
Sounds like it but Purifi themselves admitted the issue. They are not exactly known of selling audio voodoo.Sounds like a typical high-end audio voodoo...
We don't know hearing ability of customer and his use case.The "disappointment" is more likely to be produced by this kind of reviews rather than the listening experience in itself: "stupid me, these speakers suck indeed!"
Agreed. Hope Alan takes the review to heart rather than brushing it aside.From photos I've seen (many of them here) the March amps are a pretty tidy build inside. It would be surprising if the speakers couldn't reach that standard.
Completely agree with this--so much so that there should probably be some bright-line forum rule to prohibit any public accusation of double/hidden identity. Airing sock (edit: puppetting)We should not be so quick to label people sock puppets.
Perhaps restating this in standard English would help.Thank you, but the question is simple, did the bolts where tighten before measuring?
Thanks, yes I sometimes write a bit fast and english is my second language too. were tightened right?Perhaps restating this in standard English would help.
It seems that the intention of the reviewer is clear reviewing a defective unit...If I received a speaker that had distortion clearly audible in a YT video (the binding posts issue in this case) I would definitely be disappointed - even if it was practically inaudible at the listening position.
apparently the bolt torques were not altered by the owner or tester. see post by @Nuyes in response to my question:Do you mean "Were the bolts tightened before measuring?" ?
I'm really not sure, so I pose this as a question.
"Of course.Enclosure leakage mainly through the binding post appears to be the main issue.
Secondary thing was a resonance that was a lot worse in one speaker of the pair but fine in the second speaker. According to manufacturer this was inherent in the woofer frame and an email was shared from purifi to acknowledge this. Speaker Manufacturer claims they have proprietary way to mitigate this which seems to involve very specific mounting bolt torques. Here is where things get convoluted though. The speaker manufacturer claims the bolt torques were hanged by the 3rd party tester prior to testing. Third party tester claims they tested the speaker as is without altering anything and only began to modify the speaker after the poor test results were discovered
Question: has it been confirmed that the original owner of the speaker did not tighten the speaker mounting bolts in an effort to fix the speaker which was presumably noisy from the air leak???
I suppose I should have included a third option and made that to like the post to end the conversation where it stands and acknowledge that this is biased site that unreliably constrains its output according to the owner's whims. Really hoped that wasn't going to be the resolution. My preference would have been to see Amir explain why he thinks Erin is out to make a profit and Amir isn't. Amir has explained how little income benefit he has to make from this site, but his criteria for other reviewers doing this for money is flawed imho. I don't see people like Erin's making money at this. Tech Ingredients and others that get millions of hits on youtube, yes, but Erin's views aren't high enough for it to be more than a hobby.Perhaps don't talk about and move on - like Erin.
Not wanting our site to be monetized by posters is not a whim. It is core to our mission and who we are. If this doesn't fit your whim, you are out if luck as no other forum does either.I suppose I should have included a third option and made that to like the post to end the conversation where it stands and acknowledge that this is biased site that unreliably constrains its output the owner's whims. Really hoped that wasn't going to be the resolution.
Amir,Not wanting our site to be monetized by posters is not a whim. It is core to our mission and who we are. If this doesn't fit your whim, you are out if luck as no other forum does either.