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

“Alexander has dropped the Mother Of All Bombs on this situation, displaying disrespect towards the reviewing industry, and regarding reviewers as trivial annoyances that can be easily brushed aside..”

source: Tekton debacle

As someone who writes the occasional online product review and doesn’t get paid, I want to retain my rights to freedom of expression, without fear that some bully will try to suppress my speech with the threat of litigation. As long as I remain respectful, and present my opinion truthfully and accurately and without malicious intent, I should be free to say what I please to whomever I please.

@wesheadley I think we all sometimes jump into conclusion. However, not all admit it, unlike yourself 👍.

 

From another review last October:

As of this date, April 11, 2024, despite promising otherwise, company has NOT provided any measurements of any kind for this speaker. I have repeatedly asked Eric Alexander, company founder and designer, both in emails and in this thread to do so but he has refused. Yet, he has demanded that I delete the review or he would litigate against me and ask for damages. Until such time that he proves with measurements that he has a case, this review will stand.

Bad review? Sue sue sue!

Actually, I think that this whole thing started as a misunderstanding.

The speakers were initially reviewed without feet, leaving four small holes in the cabinet bottom and the tester said that he saw an anomoly in the impedience curve. I don’t know that he originally shared his curve, but what it was was a tiny lump in a portion of the curve where it really doesn’t even matter.

He reported the anomoly and the mfg suggested that he needed to put the feet on to get rid of the shift in the curve.

BUT, I think that they were talking about two completely different thngs!

The feet were installed and the reviewer did infact notice a shift in the impedience curve, just as the mfg said there should be. But, this was not the same shift of which the reviewer was commenting on, and infact, he never even noted this shift due to the lack of feet.  Also, the reviewer and mfg never did agree on what frequency the shift was occuring at.

The reviewer attributed this miniscule bump to an enclosure resonance to which the mfg took offence.

The reviewer then retested the speakers this time also turning them upside down and noted that when turned over, the miniscule bump was now gone, and this is evidence of the top panel being resonant because the weight of the speaker dampened the panel resonance.

But when I look at his data, even upside down, I still see the bump, though it is slightly flatter and broader.

If the reviewer really thought it was a cabinet resonance on the top panel, he should have laid a towel on it and put a cinder block on top of that to dampen this resonance and checked again. For all we know, an interior piece of insulation hangs in a different orientation in the upside down test causing this slight difference.

Post removed