@nonoise :)
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.
266 responses Add your response
No walking back those emails from Eric, and I found Erin’s responses to be perfectly reasonable and respectful. That’s just nasty behavior from Eric, and IMO he deserves all the business and reviews he loses because of it especially because he has a history of doing this with other reviewers. He should be ashamed of such behavior although I highly doubt it. |
Confirmation to me if you want advice on how components sound/perform listen to what multiple sources say on these forums. Reviewers add what the product is, how it works how its features compare to others, where to buy. Leave the how it sounds to the audiophiles. If no feedback exists move on. Measurements are nice to see but I prefer listening with ears. |
One general problem with YouTube and most (but not all) of the reviewers is how some new product comes out, nearly everyone reviews it within about a 3-month period, offering glowing reviews. Only later say after a year or more does it come out that, "Well, maybe it isn't all that". I've seen this happen time and time again from speakers, to streamers, to DACs, to cheap Chi-Fi amps. It seems like an endless cycle. In fact, I've almost given up on watching YouTubers at all other than for catching a decent album recommendation or just the entertainment value. |
I didn't watch Erin's review because that particular model of Tekton speaker held no interest for me. But overall, any review that Erin does is objective measurement based first, then he listens to the speaker BEFORE looking at the data to make a subjective opinion about what he is hearing, THEN looks to the data to see if what he is hearing makes sense. Not a bad way to do things. |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
I've read through the ASR stuff on this matter and would like to point out that the site's review of the Mini Lore speaker wasn't really bad or negative -- it was basically "so-so" which isn't a surprise for a company's lowest-end model. Tekton's initial defense was that they design their speakers for their subjective sound characteristics, not measurements. Had they only left it at that! That's a perfectly legitimate approach. Lots of well-known and popular audio gear doesn't score in the top ranges of ASR's "numbers" approach to evaluation and it doesn't hurt the company and their customers remain perfectly happy. ASR fan-boys were probably never much of a market for Tekton to start with. The issue was Tekton's over-the-top response -- complaining about the test results being wrong but refusing to provide any evidence of their own. And the threat of litigation didn't play well either. I can't imagine a worse way for a manufacturer to response to a so-so review than what's been done here. The way they've handled things will probably chase off far more prospective buyers than anything the review had to say. |
@soix , Going way back for that Steve Martin line!😆 |
How ridiculous would this sound if we were talking about a food review at a restaurant? The chef going online and arguing with food reviewers about how he makes his apple pie. We’ve all seen negative restaurant reviews before and sometimes the restaurant will comment and apologize for the service, food or whatever and try to redeem themselves---not argue with them. Oh well, it is what it is--I’m afraid the damage is done. Maybe a call to a good public relations agency would be a good idea. |
Je n’aime pas non plus les "bully" ... Mais Eric Alexander ressemble plus a un homme peu sur de lui réagissant avec excès qu’a un bully véritable .. Bonne nuit et bon maté 😊
|
i do not see it exactly from the same perspective but i cannot object anything about thecarpathian opinion .. 😊
|
Learned about his personality years ago on some now deleted threads where he among other things threatened to sue fellow members for 'slander'. So, @johnk , It isn't about tearing down Tekton. Its about calling out arrogant bullies who, after yet more threats of litigation against someone and the ensuing avalanche of negative press it brought, now tries to sugarcoat what he originally did by playing the misunderstood good guy. I couldn't care less about the company. I've never disparaged the sound of a Tekton speaker in my life. It's bullies I have no tolerance for. You seem a kind, decent fellow whose heart is in the right place. The world needs more people like you. |
@johnk the problem is that it's Tekton's own doing, not upset audio geeks'. He keeps digging in, keeps arguing, coming up with awkward excuses (litigation is two lawyers having a friendly talk) and keeps this issue alive instead of just walking away from the mic. He himself blew it up. Erin didn't, the forums and other reviewers didn't, it burns everyone. An awkward lose-lose situation that nobody enjoys talking about. Tekton speakers are good value, some people love it, some don't, that's what should matter. Nobody should have ever learned about his personality. |
Given the diverse viewpoints expressed, from the ethical considerations underscored by @mapman insights on the value of diverse information, to the cautionary tale of potential litigation chilling honest dialogue as highlighted by others, we're prompted to ask: How can we, as a community, nurture a culture where honest reviews are both valued and integral to the audio world's evolution, and where criticism serves as a bridge to understanding and enhancement rather than a precursor to confrontation? |
People like scapegoating and they like to hate... I remember the days where someone here was very much hated... I dont mind if the reason to hate were good or bad... I dont hate anybody , but i reacted to posts for sure ... 😁 I understand the two sides here and i sympathize with the two sides... All is rarely black or white about anybody nor about any matter ... In the meantime there is an acoustic revolution and nobody pay attention... All eyes are on our dearest chosen scapegoat...😊 |
Didn't miss the point at all this is just about tearing down Tekton. Sure they messed this up. But its not like they are selling defective products or taking folks money Tekton complained about what they perceived as an inaccuracy in testing. And Tekton worded there response in a legally threating way and that was wrong. But to destroy all those folks work because a few audio geeks are upset is just cruel.
|
| Post removed |
Companies offering goods and services for sale have often been found by courts to be limited-purpose public figures in the context of defamation. In this case there's a pretty closely on point precedent in the Bose v. Consumer Reports case the Supreme Court decided 40+ years ago, in which Bose was treated as a public figure. I don't think Bose even disputed the notion that it was a limited-purpose public figure in that case, IIRC. |
I must say, as someone who spent decades in the journalism business, for both big and small news organizations, this is pretty much 180-degree opposite to fundamental journalist ethics. A journalist’s responsibility is first and foremost to provide true information to the readers, and in the case of the sort of consumer journalism that product reviewing is, where you’re helping readers make informed decisions, providing information about less than good product is crucial. Of course, journalists have a responsibility to be fair with and about the subjects of their reviews. But their responsibility is not to protect the reputation of the manufacturer who delivers a subpar product by killing the negative review and returning the product to the manufacturer. That not only makes the journalist an agent of the manufacturer essentially but also erodes the publication’s credibility with readers, who are the customers you have responsibility to. It’s absolutely corrosive to journalism ethics and effectiveness. Any of the reasons of competency offered as reasons to assume a bad review is being offered unethically or with ulterior motivation could equally apply to good reviews. There’s no reason to assume that one is any more competently or ethically delivered than the other. Which is not to suggest that the audio press has ever been a bastion of journalistic standards -- there’s plenty that erodes reader confidence in the audio press: long term equipment loans, extremely cozy manufacturer and retailer relationships with journalists and editors -- but among those things, this unwillingness to publish bad reviews and the hermetic belief of where ones responsibility lies that suggests that the proper thing to do when encountering a bad product is not to inform the public but keep it from the public and inform the manufacturer instead, is a dozy. The best answer to mediocre journalism, technical incompetence and the inevitable tensions between the editorial and business sides of the house (especially in enthusiast and trade publishing where your sources and your advertisers are often from the same community), isn’t just to throw one’s hand up and say, fine, let’s just publish puff pieces.
|
@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. |
since Erin's character has been a subject here, let me contribute. When I finished my speaker web site (a hobby and nothing more) I reached out to about 6 hifi/audiophile youtubers to ask if they had any feedback, would they used it for their research, etc. Nobody responded. I usually resend my emails once. Still no response. One had obviously reviewed it and used my lines from it in his next review - at least I knew he saw it. Erin was the 7th, I found his channel a few weeks later. He responded the same day, and gave me a lot of feedback, links and a contact I was happy to use. I have no idea who he is, where he is, I watched about 12 of his videos and enjoyed them all, and I sure know he is different, not a egoistic type A media star but a nerd with a big heart. I don't want to mention names of the ones who ignored me, but none of their reviews amount much beyond entertainment whereas Erin's reviews aim and reach much higher. It's unfortunate that when someone is objective, he gets attacked, whereas all the wishy-washy, full of disclaimers, shiny, useless reviews live happily ever after. |
| Post removed |
@grislybutter +1. He's his own worst enemy. |
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. |
People on audio forums trying to understand how litigation works. It would be hilarious if it wasn’t pathetic. To be honest and pair, this situation does not affect me, so why should it matter to me? It feels like church gossip. It’s been pointed out, time and time again, audio reviews are often far to positive to the manufacturers and designers (which buyers should be wary of) and now all this about a negative review? Why not just sort out the good and bad reviews, listen for one’s self and make an informed decision? BTW anyone (at least in the USA has the right to seek legal action for any number of things). Is this not correct? |
....out of popcorn, but getting the concept of courtrooms becoming even more wound up in minutiae and the subtlety of perceptions, measured or perceived IRL... ....not surprising, given the daily dilatants dirge dunk on the news.... ....the 'how low can things go' is an easy answer: No Bottom to the Universe.
|
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
