Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

hi fi companies bordering on irresponsible


  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#31 kajak12

kajak12

    ENJOY YOUR JOURNEY

  • Members
  • 4,998 posts
  • Location: WA
  • Country: Australia

Posted 24 March 2012 - 09:20 PM

You are being serious aren't you?

Yes very serious you can enjoy life and spend $$$ or leave it for others to spend..................

Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank......

Give a man a bank and he can rob the world..........


#32 rantan

rantan

    dazed & confused

  • Members
  • 2,978 posts
  • Location: SA
  • Country: Lollapalooza

Posted 24 March 2012 - 09:28 PM

Oh noooooooooo !! :(

Imagine companies making grandiose claims to market their product, whatever will we get next? I thought all audio companies were honest and upright entities who have our best interests at heart and know I find out that this may not be true

This is obviously an outrage and as such represents then final chapter of civilised behavior as we once knew it.

Edited by rantan, 24 March 2012 - 09:30 PM.


#33 kajak12

kajak12

    ENJOY YOUR JOURNEY

  • Members
  • 4,998 posts
  • Location: WA
  • Country: Australia

Posted 24 March 2012 - 09:29 PM

It's not just hifi. Coke ads keep telling me that if I drink it I'll be happy. All advertisers lie.

Coke + jack daniels make me happy (they forgot to include that in the coke add)

Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank......

Give a man a bank and he can rob the world..........


#34 Dismord

Dismord

    Member

  • Members
  • 624 posts
  • Location: VIC

Posted 24 March 2012 - 10:15 PM

There's a significant difference in the way a lot of marketing works in the audio industry from most others ( apart from new age self-improvement schemes and cults). The difference may explain one reason the younger generation think we're all just a bit mad. It's the snake oil and pseudo occult rubbish this industry is tainted with. Try explaining the science behind something like Mpingo disks to a non audiophile as see where you get. But hey, it's not just industry hype and bullshit at work here. Audiophiles themselves have demonstrated a bewildering willingness to swallow gallons of snake oil over the decades. So, who really is to blame for the undeniable fact that we are often regarded as more than a little mad my 'normal' people. And let's not forget the role of the audioporn press in providing space for absurd advertising claims and then backing them with reviews that need to be taken with a large pinch of salt if not total disbelief.

#35 Janjuc

Janjuc

    Lost Soul ©

  • Members
  • 1,149 posts
  • Location: In an Outer Spiral Arm Of a Galaxy We Call the Milky Way
  • Country: Oz

Posted 25 March 2012 - 08:51 AM

I think I need to take a Vitamin Pill after reading all this ....

JJ

"Music is the wine that fills the cup of silence" - Fripp

 

 

 


#36 Arg

Arg

    The Argentinian

  • Members
  • 949 posts
  • Location: SA
  • Country: Australia

Posted 25 March 2012 - 02:28 PM

Too late to get our knickers in a knot over Linns' absurd claims

and much too late to bring up 1982 CD slogans

when we should now be asking questions about so called high-resolution downloads. English Hi-Fi News & Record Review magazine is , bless em, publishing graphs of these downloads with reviews. It appears we aren't always getting what we pay for.

And it will only get worse. I mean, hardly any music recordings actually have the bandwidth of high res formats anyway.

If I buy a 24/96 of an analogue 60's recording and due to the 60's mics and tape machines there is nothing over 18k, am I ripped off?

If in 2015 I buy a 32/384k download of a 24/192 recording made in 2010, am I ripped off despite thre being nothing of any note above 96k in the original signal feeds?