Thin Line Between Critique and Courtrooms: A Dialogue on the Recent Audiophile Drama

@viridian from what I read, your point regarding how ASR acquires things to test is correct. I would only add that pretty much every review on ASR by the main honcho at least does identify the source of the item tested and disclaimers regarding review results based on uncertainties are also commonly cited. I find the reviews to be quite fair and valuable accordingly. Some reviews come out mostly rosy but seldom completely and others not so much, at all price points . It’s an imperfect process always to some degree but what isn’t? It’s just another source of diverse info that one can synthesize into their buying decisions that may not be available at all otherwise. No concrete information to inform buying decisions other than marketing literature is the worst case scenario. THe more information put forth in good faith, the better.

make speakers not war

Sage advice!

Bottom line is I am in general always against censorship, including hifi reviews. Just take things for what they are worth and let the cards fall where they may. THere will be some false positives and negatives naturally along the way. Time will tell.

It’s a dog eat dog world out there for sure. Ethics may often take a back seat which is quite an unfortunate thing really. 

The point is there are reviews with no feet actually posted on Tekton’s website that do not use the feet on the speakers that he knocked for the review.

Yes I believe that to be true in which case add that to the mix regarding how all this comes off to potential buyers.

Sad thing to me is Tekton offers unique products that have garnered pretty decent reviews. Not everyone’s cup of tea but what is? I get it that the owner is passionate about his products, but everyone can benefit from a little more self awareness and respect for others.

For me, a useful  response for a vendor who has objections to a review is to cite the objection politely and then give the other person a chance to respond and see where it goes from there.

I have not observed two sides to this particular story. Seems to be just a single story and little debate about how it unfolded.  

Having reviewed this case, my verdict is the reviewer is in general very thorough based on other reviews of his I have read and did nothing wrong that I can discern in the TEkton case of concern. There were suggestions made regarding improvements and reviewer agreed to a second review with that in mind (holes in the cabinet for footers by design that ideally should be plugged...strange but apparently true). Tekton guy was combative and way out of line threatening legal action up front as opposed to engaging in constructive discourse and looks bad accordingly which is bad PR period. Case closed.

Note: I have observed in general that it is a common thing on ASR site for reviewer to do a follow-up  or revised review in cases where vendor or others point out a valid defect in the process,  and admit mistakes or oversights prior, which is admirable and how it should be.