Originally Posted by RMK!
Oh the photo's were taken to put the subs finish in the worst light were they? As opposed to what? A marketing glam shot would have been more appropriate? The OP's intent was to show shoddy workmanship and next to zero QA for a commercial product. Mission accomplished!
You are trying to spin this as some sort of conspiracy, hog wash. Craigsub has made this bed by his own actions. He has a LONG history of being banned here at AVS and other forum sites for being an argumentative hot head. Many of you new members are not aware of this and only look at his sub comparison data (controversial in and of itself).
Other's seem to not mind this level of build/component quality and I say good for them ... enjoy.
You have been prolific in you praise of CHT and it's products. That's fine, as is your defense of CHT. But there is much more to this story than what appears on the surface. It has to do with civility, honesty and good business practices.
BTW, what does your criticism of Penngray and how your speakers perform have to do with the topic of this thread? It is a thinly veiled attempt to discredit him. The best defense is a good offense ... isn't it?
Fire away doc?
Geez. Such hostility. As others have posted, this thread is clearly about Josh expecting too much from a sub (you know, things like an evenly finished paint job, no brad nail holes, feet that are aligned, a dust cap that doesn't appear to leak, feet that don't leak when removed - hellllooo this is called the "ported option" and adds even more output to the sub - both HSU and SVS have subs with this option yet no one complains, a severely scratched surface, etc., all things that are now termed "rustic"). Then unbelievably expecting a response within a few days of sending photos. Then, incredibly, not accepting alternate products from the same company in return. Sending the products back expecting a full refund due to the issues above which are clearly features of the sub (I mean, Craig himself rightfully asked "so you want to return it in compliance with our return policy ... right"?). Then getting charged $400 (really, $400?) to ship the subs back and forth, as per the return policy which apparently, I mean, obviously, relates to defective products as well. Having the gall to post that experience online ONLY 30 days after everything started (again, isn't 90 to 180 days the accepted norm?), then essentially being called a liar by the owner of CHT (clearly the correct thing to do here), the owner pointing out the "obvious" fact that Josh clearly used WAY too much light in his photos, kept them too much in focus, and, good lord, used a zoom lense to show these defects (heck, didn't you see how different the two pictures of penelope cruz or whomever the actress was which clearly showed a picture can lie!?), and rightly implying that the additional damage on the subwoofer wasn't the cause of the courier, but of the purchaser (but not directly saying Josh did that on purpose, cause that would be wrong).
Don't you know this is how start up ID companies treat their consumers? Sheesh. Josh is clearly in the wrong here and should have expected that kind of quality based on the high res photos of the subs on CHT's website, which clearly show this rustic look. You know, again, scratches, uneven paint job, chewed off side of the sub, brad nail holes, feet that aren't aligned (okay, actually, you can sort of make that out), feet that would leak if removed (both SVS and ACI have this option as well remember), a dust cap that supposedly leaked.
RMK, you just have anger management issues and are out to get Craig. Come, drink heavily with me to rid yourself of them.