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


Hey Audiogonians,

In the vast, vibrant universe of audio reviews, where the line between subjective opinion and objective analysis often blurs, a new saga unfolds. It involves a Youtuber, well-known within our community for their take on speaker designs – designs that, while innovative, haven't shied away from criticism. The plot thickens with another Youtuber's revelation: the speaker's designer and manufacturer has filed a lawsuit against a reviewer over their less-than-glowing feedback.

The core of the debate? Whether it's acceptable to push back against reviewers when their findings diverge from what manufacturers desire. It's not a new drama; history is littered with tales of reviewers facing legal threats for daring to express their truth. Yet, each story brings a fresh perspective on the delicate dance between free speech and brand reputation.

This particular episode raises several intriguing questions:
- Where do we draw the line between constructive criticism and damaging feedback?
- Is the courtroom really the arena for settling disputes over reviews, or should dialogue prevail?
- And crucially, what does this mean for the future of honest, independent audio reviews?

This isn't just about the nitty-gritty of legal battles, many of which remain cloaked in confidentiality and technical jargon. It's about the principle: the right to voice one's opinion in a space that thrives on diversity of thought.

So, fellow audiophiles, what's your take? Have you ever felt swayed by a review, only to discover a different truth upon listening? Have you faced the ire of those who didn't appreciate your candid feedback?

📢Let's make this a discussion to remember – not just for the controversy, but for the unity and respect we can foster, even in disagreement.

 

128x128rowlocktrysail

my 2 cents to Tekton: stop posting, talking, messaging, communicating about it.

It will go away - make speakers not war

@deep_333 

Few "goofs who think they know it all" invest in the same $100k+ Klippel NFS that brands like KEF and Magico use to measure and refine these designs.  Erin @ Erin's Audio Corner has used that scanner, which he invested in,  to produce dozens of speaker measurements on gear ranging from $100 entries of entry-level budget active speakers up to KEF Blades 2 Metas. Those, incidentally, came out to be within known margins of error for the measurements KEF produced in their white paper.  In some circles, he's held in significantly higher regard than the ASR crowd because his reviews start with subjective opinions, then move to objective measurements, and finally align those with his subjective impressions.  Occasionally he will also spend time highlighting and discussing where they do not.  Often, the latter are cases of "we see an irregularity in the FR graph, but I didn't pick up on it in my listening sessions like I did some other areas."  Also, unlike ASR, he acknowledges the existence of subjective listening preferences and highlights what his personal ones are and how they can be visually identified in the measurements. 

The complaint lodged against Erin was not that he used the equipment incorrectly, but that the speaker feet, which were not included with the speakers donated, weren't installed on the speaker when it was measured. That the inserts for those feet were completely drilled through cabinet walls and into the body itself is a separate discussion aside. Multiple individuals I know of in the speaker design either speak disparagingly of this approach, or at best identify to likely be a cost-cutting measure. They make clear it is not standard practice to introduce additional opportunities for air to exit the cabinet. Per them, the common practice is to either not breach the cabinet wall at all, or, if it's necessary from the length of the mounting hardware, to do so in positions that put them into internal bracing points for the cabinet so the cabinet wall integrity is maintained with or without the feet inserted. I strongly suspect that when he publishes the revised data on those Tektons, measured with the feet installed as Eric demanded, you'll see that the minor flaws he highlighted in his largely positive original review still exist in the revised measurements. 

Whether or not those matters highlighted in Erin's impact your enjoyment of the speakers is a matter of subjective opinion. Eric's ego-driven, impulsive overreaction to those minor issues being called out is another matter entirely. Threatening to initiate litigation over this, Eric's tapdancing damage-control BS about how,"I will begin litigation first thing in the morning if the review isn't pulled" (his exact words in the written communication) didn't mean suing Erin aside, this is a PR disaster of the first order for Tekton, and one entirely of Eric's own making.