Vapor Audio Cirrus? - Page 8

The more I see from each side, the more I think it makes both parties look bad.

My two cents.

I think we've heard and seen more than enough.

Take it to court. This isn't the place for this nonsense.

^^^ I agree 100% with you and being discontent. I too would expect perfection for that amount of money. But the main question is, why did you not return the speakers immediately upon noticing such defects in workmanship and demand a refund or replacement speakers? One of those two options would have been prudent choices. Were both or either options offered and available to you by Vapor?

I have an idea to solve this but first, some background information:

Ryan purchsed an amplifier from me 5 years ago. We stayed in touch periodically and met in person at the Lone Star Audio Fest two years ago where we were both displaying our products. We visited each others room a number of times and drank a few bottles of wine together. He struck me as a very bright man and fun to hang with. I think he builds an excellent speaker both sonically and in the cabinet lamination technology, the latter being the best I have ever seen. This is a separate issue from the cosmetic problems discussed in this thread. I had recently changed the topology of my amplifiers away from the ICEpower modules that I was using. Ryan liked the sound enough to offer me a review for a web based operation whose name escapes me. My only request was that he not divulge the topology I had switched to. He told me 4-6 weeks would be the review period round trip.

After four months with no response from Ryan, I left a series of messages for him that went unanswered for two more months. When I finally got him on the telephone, he told me the amplifier was packed up and ready to ship to me that afternoon. Four more months went by with no amplifier, and no response to any messages. I finally had to go on six forums to get the message out that Ryan had my amplifier and I wanted it back. This shamed him into action and I finally got it back. He went on to release an informal, but favorable review on one of the forums but did reveal the topology I used after I had specifically asked him not to. I think it is fair to say that his word is less than reliable.

OK, on to the present issue. I believe one of two actions should take place.

1) Return the speakers to Ryan for a full refund.
2) Send the speakers back to Ryan for repair. Before doing this, Ryan should agree in writing to what he will do and a reasonable turnaround time to make the necessary repairs.

I believe this is make or break time for Ryan's reputation as a business person. Especailly knowing the results of this will be public knowledge on this forum and probably others.

I normally stay out of issues like this but someone added me to this thread and I have been following it for some time.

Regards to All,

Dennis

By reading here, "fixing" them is not an option, as there is no way to make them perfect again (especially since it is claimed that the veneer no longer exists), without essentially building a new box and swapping over components. Dennis, just wow, what an experience you had to go through.

Then return them and get your money back. Sheesh! How hard could that be?

I know absolutely nothing about Vapor speakers (I just discovered this thread an hour ago), but I've seen this sort of drama play out on other forums in the past. I am in no way picking sides (I don't have the knowledge to do so), but defending yourself against dissatisfied customers on a public forum never ends well for the small business owner. It doesn't even matter who's "right" or "wrong," the drama just creates a bad buzz about the business.

I used to be an active member of a local community forum, and there was a new restaurant in town that was fairly popular. A few people complained on the forum about poor service, and the owner went on the defensive, going back and forth with these people. It got to the point where even his defenders had turned on him, and the restaurant closed within a couple of months.

Anyhow, I hope you guys can come to a peaceful resolution...

I dont want to get into this issue but this statement is also applicable to vapor. Would he be a man of honor in public forum to tell the buyer in formal writing that he would return the money once the speakers are returned. The way I see this based on previous posts is that the only plan of action of vapor is to fix the speakers and no refund. If this would be the case, the only option for the buyer is to pursue vapor in the court of law.

Agree 100%, my parents run a business so I know thing or two about satisfying customer (customer ego and/or need). rno63 posted an email from ryan-vapor audio, 2-3 days ago in this thread which was mysteriously removed by someone, but if that is how vapor does business then good luck everybody.

A full refund offer was made public back in July and then followed up with details in private email which can't be posted. Vapor had to try and find another buyer for the speakers first and then go through an escrow service which included contingencies upon arrival. The main problem was that Vapor would not admit to the gouge/tear in the left side of the one speaker or the pit mark in the front baffle. The contingency was based on no damage to the speakers and they only claimed they knew of a flaw on the back of the speaker which doesn't exist.

I tried to post the details on the most recent repair option but the post was removed. It's not as simple as just sending the speakers back for repair. Again there were contingencies and accusations about me causing or further damaging the speakers. Still no admitting on there part of the gouge in the one side of the speaker. They mention that I had taken a tool and either caused or made the damage much worse. There is more but......


Ryan finally admitted just yesterday to the "irregularity" on the left side of the one speaker which he knows is permanent. It is a pretty big irregularity. Big enough that he hid it from his pictures he sent me before final payment.

What is at stake here is larger than the cost of these speakers - it is the public's perception of a company. When people buy any brand - or particularly an ID brand - they are buying reputation. The fact that this can be so drawn out is potentially driving away new sales.

I had an issue with an Outlaw receiver - I posted a gripe on AVS. Within 1 day, the owner of Outlaw contacted me, sent me a new receiver and made sure all issues were resolved. Since that day I have been a die-hard Outlaw fan. Another amp, my Exposure 2010S2 had a slight channel imbalance. I emailed Exposure. Within a week, I had a package from England with a new component that fixed the issue. This is how you develop trust and a dedicated customer base.

If I can offer any advice here, it would be to issue a full and immediate refund. Bury it and move on.

You guys who keep saying refund, refund, refund ... do you realize I have the exact same refund policy as Salk or any other custom builder? Not just custom builders of speakers, but anything. If you as the customer comission a custom build, your veneer, your crossover components, etc, I can't just buy them back and wait for another customer to hopefully want the exact same configuration. What I offer, as ALL other custom builders do, is that if you want a refund I will find a buyer for them. That's exactly what I had worked out, I had a buyer ready, but Paul didn't like the terms of the deal. He instead chose to continue the current course of action, which is live with the speaker which in his words sound "f**king amazing" and attack me whenever/wherever possible on the internet.

Paul is also neglecting to mention that he chose a non-grain filled finish on the speakers. This was explained to him well before delivery. Grain-filled would have all the pores filled and be glass smooth, non grain-filled would have pores and some grain still visible through the finish. The mark on the side, and the pit in the baffle he mentions have would have been filled had he chosen to pay the extra money for the glass smooth finish ... but he did not. I can hardly see how that's my fault, but since he's chosen to take this to the court of public opinion, I can understand how without that information, one would assume that it is.

Again, I can fix those issues without problem. In fact, I'm sure I can fix them and make the speakers even more beautiful than they were when I took the pictures posted because my finishing process is much better than it was a year ago. Paul is being true to his word however when he said to me in an email that he "plans to unleash hell on the internet", but for the repair to happen he'll have to take a breath and step back from that position. I'm just as willing to perform whatever repairs are necessary now as I was 7 months ago when this started.

Dennis, you told me it was FINE to take pictures of the inside knowing they would be published in any potential review (which didn't happen through no fault of my own). And I don't remember divulging anything about the inside of your amps, I suppose you have a link to where I did? I did however post here and a couple times on AudioCircle saying they sounded quite nice, and were in fact the best sounding Class-D amps I've ever heard. I was even ridiculed here for saying so because of the prevailing AVS mentality that all amps sound the same.

Ryan spins the story so many ways that there is no way to keep track of what really happened.

Ryan, is this the tiny divot that I didn't notice for weeks? Really?
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?action=gallery;area=browse;image=71084;size=xlarge

Your comment regarding the finish is yet another way to cover your tracks. Ryan talked me out of the gloss finish and when the speakers arrived I knew why. Ryan said the gloss would not look as good as the natural finish with this particular veneer. I had the money to do whatever I wanted so that wasn't an issue. Remember these are 6k monitors!

I guess Ryan can ship flawed veneer to you if you don't order a gloss finish! This makes zero sense and I would think any of the other speaker builders would inform the customer that they are getting flawed or defective veneer before taking their money.

You are right again Ryan, I can't trust you. It started out that way and it hasn't changed.

Are you going to spend the rest of your life complaining or do something about this? You have options but only choose to stretch out the debate, I guess thinking your are hurting Ryan's business reputation? I would of had this resolved months ago without even going public with it.

Paul told me that he was going to do as much damage to my business and reputation as possible. He knows this back and forth ONLY hurts me, so he fully intends to continue. Paul doesn't care how it hurts my family, nor does he care how it hurts my employees or their families. His ony concern is making us bleed.

You know, in 7 months of this nonsense, Paul hasn't once said to us in an email or phone call what we can do to fix things in his mind. Not once has he said what we can do to make things right, even though we have asked him numerous times and offered many suggestions.

Ryan, I asked for a full refund as you promised on Audiogon. Audiogon sent me the screen shot of the offer. Pete Schumacher wrote me back with the ridiculous details and then said Vapor Audio does not have that kind of money laying around for a full refund. I can post the emails. He then went on to lie about only knowing of a flaw on the back of the speaker which doesn't exist. You guys side stepped the veneer issues from day one!

Get the money together, let me know when you want to finish the deal. I paid you through paypal with no questions asked. Just reverse the transaction as requested before. That did not seem to hard to do to me. I believe you had another agenda with the contingency offer since you would not admit to the defective veneer.

I even offered in the very beginning for you to pay me back for the stands and be done with everything. You ignored these emails as well. The offer on the table at that time was a mere $400 off the 6k pair of flawed monitors which were an 8/10 on arrival.