AVS Forum banner

1 - 20 of 41 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,754 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I was pretty amused reading about this. It started when somebody at another audio forum posted a review of them . The review contains some interesting claims which apparently originated with Raidho, such as:
Quote:
...two large vases with bamboo sticks spread out at the front of the wall, directly in line behind the speakers works wonderful as diffusors (and looks good too!). In the Raidho testing room, that's all they have.

and also:
Quote:
Electronic devices (and even cables) produce energy, and stands which are designed to keep that energy in the device have negative results because the energy from the device cannot escape. The folks at Raidho believes that racks and other devices which keep the energy in the device or the wires produce negative results. The energy needs to escape. Keeping the energy in the device can have negative audible results.

First, some problems with boomy bass were noted. But one poster found a supposed solution: break them in for 450+ hours and put granite slabs under them! From this post :
Quote:
450+ hours of break in works wonders. For even more taming of the bass - try a slab of granite under each speaker.
Another poster agreed :
Quote:
450+ hours is mandatory. granite is almost mandatory.

Then news got out about the speakers making a popping sound when played loudly, although it's not clear from the thread where this was first noted. One poster experienced the popping problem and followed some internet advice for how to fix it, or at least to make it so it only occurs at higher levels than it usually does. The solution? Cables! Here are some quotes from the relevant post .
Quote:
What I wanted to write up here is that I have read in various posts over the internet that the Raidho D3s would POP at a higher volume if one used the Ansuz cables over a different brand. This always made some sense to me since they were designed around the Ansuz cables

So in go the Ansuz cables, at a cost of $91,000 (although it appears that he may have borrowed them).
Quote:
Last weekend I had the pressure (sic) to have a complete Ansuz Diamond cable system at my house. This comprised of 4 power cords, 1 1M XRL and 1 2M XRL interconnects. This with the 2M speaker cables I already have in my system made a total Ansuz Diamond cable "Loom". All $91,000 of Ansuz cables. ($10,000x4, 14,000, 21,000 & 16,000)

Later in the discussion, Raidho stepped in and offered to fix the problem. The catch? The owner must ship the speakers to Denmark at his or her own expense! Nonetheless, posters responded with accolades and awards . Too funny!


But then one wonders why these speakers are doing this in the first place. Some clues are given in the specifications posted in this review of the speaker . The woofer complement consist of three 115 mm "diamond bass drivers". IOW, three 4.5 inch woofers in a $79,000 speaker system. What could possibly go wrong at high SPLs?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
405 Posts
I don't blame any company that takes advantage of deluded audiophools. People who buy this junk obviously won't miss the money, and their confirmation bias will make the speakers sound wonderful. Everybody wins.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,445 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ketnis  /t/1522269/79-000-raidho-d-3-speake...-reaches-95-db-at-1-meter/0_100#post_24474423


I don't blame any company that takes advantage of deluded audiophools. People who buy this junk obviously won't miss the money, and their confirmation bias will make the speakers sound wonderful. Everybody wins.
 

So you don't think that there is anything morally wrong with fraud?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
405 Posts
No, I just think it's funny when a deluded person with too much money willingly gets taken by scumbag company, then goes onto a forum and defends said company like their life depends on it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,127 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack D Ripper  /t/1522269/79-000-raidho-d-3-speake...en-spl-reaches-95-db-at-1-meter#post_24474448

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ketnis  /t/1522269/79-000-raidho-d-3-speake...-reaches-95-db-at-1-meter/0_100#post_24474423


I don't blame any company that takes advantage of deluded audiophools. People who buy this junk obviously won't miss the money, and their confirmation bias will make the speakers sound wonderful. Everybody wins.

So you don't think that there is anything morally wrong with fraud?

Had to look up the difference between ethics vs morals
http://www.diffen.com/difference/Ethics_vs_Morals
Quote:
Ethics and morals both relate to “right” and “wrong” conduct. However, ethics refer to the series of rules provided to an individual by an external source. e.g. their profession. On the other hand, morals refer to an individual’s own principles regarding right and wrong.
vs


So, if by some persons upbringing or solical beliefs they believe fraud is "right" then in their eyes it is right.


However, I do believe (w/o having the source data) that a majority of humans would say that fraud is "wrong", including me.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
18,829 Posts
As long as we are talking about definitions, here is the one for Fraud:


fraud: wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain.


For this to be right, we have to know that the cable vendors 100% believe that what they sell provides no added value. That is, they are objectivists and not in the camp that their customers are. Do we know this to be true for all of them?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
14,420 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm  /t/1522269/79-000-raidho-d-3-speake...en-spl-reaches-95-db-at-1-meter#post_24481973


As long as we are talking about definitions, here is the one for Fraud:


fraud: wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain.


For this to be right, we have to know that the cable vendors 100% believe that what they sell provides no added value. That is, they are objectivists and not in the camp that their customers are. Do we know this to be true for all of them?

Good example of cherry picking s defintiion in such a way that fraud cannot be asserted without being able read minds.


Here's another definition:

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/fraud


A false representation of a matter of fact—whether by words or by conduct, by false or misleading allegations, or by concealment of what should have been disclosed—that deceives and is intended to deceive another so that the individual will act upon it to her or his legal injury.


In this context a key phrase is: "...concealment of what should have been disclosed..."


If a person represents themselves as an authority about audio then they should know the things that true authorities in the field of audio know, and that would seem to include knowing snake oil from good technology.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,754 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozzie Isaac  /t/1522269/79-000-raidho-d-3-speake...en-spl-reaches-95-db-at-1-meter#post_24482284


How does one get into the business of selling $91k cable set? Think they sell their seconds to monoprice at a discount?

Pretty crazy stuff, isn't it? At first I thought a company making $91k cable sets would never be able to sustain such a business model. But then I realized that a small enough company with a low enough overhead only needs is a small number of marks to keep the scam going.


BTW, according to Myles B. Astor (not to be confused with Myles A. Astor or Myles C. Astor
), "Lars" from Raidho is apparently Lars Christiansen, a former owner of the Nordost company. I would think Nordost would be a pretty lucrative scam, so I wonder why he is no longer an owner. There's lots more overhead making speakers than cables.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,445 Posts

Let's not get too carried away with technical definitions.  I am not an attorney writing a legal document.  By "fraud," I mean what is commonly meant by it:

 

Wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain

 

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/english/fraud?q=fraud

 

Notice, it can be either wrongful or criminal, and need not be both.  

 

My post was a response to another post; here is mine quoting the post to which I was responding:

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack D Ripper  /t/1522269/79-000-raidho-d-3-speake...-reaches-95-db-at-1-meter/0_100#post_24474448

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ketnis  /t/1522269/79-000-raidho-d-3-speake...-reaches-95-db-at-1-meter/0_100#post_24474423


I don't blame any company that takes advantage of deluded audiophools. People who buy this junk obviously won't miss the money, and their confirmation bias will make the speakers sound wonderful. Everybody wins.
 

So you don't think that there is anything morally wrong with fraud?
 

 

Now, what I was responding to was the idea of whether or not blame should be attached to a "company that takes advantage of deluded audiophools."  Notice, this need not apply to the company referenced in the opening post; it was a general statement to which I was replying, so we need not prove anything about any specific company.

 

One would not normally describe a company as taking advantage of someone if the falsehood were accidental, and that they were deluded suggests that someone has caused them to believe the falsehood.  We can see that my understanding of the post was further confirmed with the response:

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ketnis  /t/1522269/79-000-raidho-d-3-speake...-reaches-95-db-at-1-meter/0_100#post_24474471


No, I just think it's funny when a deluded person with too much money willingly gets taken by scumbag company, then goes onto a forum and defends said company like their life depends on it.
 

One would not normally refer to a company as a "scumbag company" if it made an honest mistake; this wording very strongly suggests something wrong about the manner in which the company does business; such as committing fraud, for example.  (If it were an honest mistake, it would be more likely to be described as an incompetent company, or a company run by idiots; "scumbag" seems more to suggest something other than an honest mistake.)

 

 

But even if we were going to turn the matter into a lawyer's discussion, the claim that one would have to have 100% knowledge is false in courts of law.  Depending on what the matter is, it can be a preponderance of evidence, or for matters requiring a greater certainty, it can be beyond a reasonable doubt.  Absolute certainty is never required to make a legal decision.  So you never have to really be a mind reader in a court of law; what the person thinks is inferred by the person's words and deeds.

 

Additionally, there would be no need of legal proof for all venders of useless products in a lawsuit; it would only be the companies being accused in the courtroom that one would need to be concerned about.  To put this another way, if you bring a lawsuit against a particular company that sells snake oil useless products and you are alleging fraud, the court is only concerned with that one company and its practices, not with the other sellers of useless products.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,445 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozzie Isaac  /t/1522269/79-000-raidho-d-3-speake...-reaches-95-db-at-1-meter/0_100#post_24482284


How does one get into the business of selling $91k cable set? ...
 

 

Simple.  Either make, or have another company make, some cable, and set up a web site offering it for $91k.  You will want to make sure your cable is pretty and distinctive looking, if you wish to really make any sales.  You also need to write up some interesting claims about their performance.  You then may decide to send samples to idiot reviewers online or in print magazines, making sure you only send it to idiot reviewers and not to those with any sense.  Some one of them might imagine it improves the sound, and then you can reference their review from your web site.  Since the cable isn't going to cost much to make or have made (unless you are an idiot who pays too much), you will only need to make one sale a year to live on this business.  If you can sell three or four a year, you can live well on this.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
18,829 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack D Ripper  /t/1522269/79-000-raidho-d-3-speake...en-spl-reaches-95-db-at-1-meter#post_24482420


One would not normally describe a company as taking advantage of someone if the falsehood were accidental, and that they were deluded suggests that someone has caused them to believe the falsehood.  We can see that my understanding of the post was further confirmed with the response:


One would not normally refer to a company as a "scumbag company" if it made an honest mistake; this wording very strongly suggests something wrong about the manner in which the company does business; such as committing fraud, for example.  (If it were an honest mistake, it would be more likely to be described as an incompetent company, or a company run by idiots; "scumbag" seems more to suggest something other than an honest mistake.)
All of this still presupposes that the cable companies are objectivist. That they believe in double blind tests and measurement validity. Do we think they have secretly run double blind tests and decided to not tell us??? Oh, wait, I do know one instance of this happening. Fortunately it was captured in this documentary:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
14,420 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozzie Isaac  /t/1522269/79-000-raidho-d-3-speake...en-spl-reaches-95-db-at-1-meter#post_24482284


How does one get into the business of selling $91k cable set? Think they sell their seconds to monoprice at a discount?

Monster Cable remainders their surplus cable out to either Parts Express or MCM, I can't remember which, but I've definitely bought some from one or both. Not badly made and easily worth a small fraction of MSRP.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
14,420 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm  /t/1522269/79-000-raidho-d-3-speake...en-spl-reaches-95-db-at-1-meter#post_24482584


All of this still presupposes that the cable companies are objectivist. That they believe in double blind tests and measurement validity. Do we think they have secretly run double blind tests and decided to not tell us??? Oh, wait, I do know one instance of this happening.

If memory serves the founder of a very large even monstrous cable company did sit though some DBTs of his products maybe 20 years ago. My lips are sealed!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
18,829 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by mtbdudex  /t/1522269/79-000-raidho-d-3-speake...en-spl-reaches-95-db-at-1-meter#post_24482119


Amir, being Philosophical Phil on a Friday now?
Nahhh... Just having fun with the usual crew.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,445 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm  /t/1522269/79-000-raidho-d-3-speake...-reaches-95-db-at-1-meter/0_100#post_24482584

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack D Ripper  /t/1522269/79-000-raidho-d-3-speake...en-spl-reaches-95-db-at-1-meter#post_24482420


One would not normally describe a company as taking advantage of someone if the falsehood were accidental, and that they were deluded suggests that someone has caused them to believe the falsehood.  We can see that my understanding of the post was further confirmed with the response:


One would not normally refer to a company as a "scumbag company" if it made an honest mistake; this wording very strongly suggests something wrong about the manner in which the company does business; such as committing fraud, for example.  (If it were an honest mistake, it would be more likely to be described as an incompetent company, or a company run by idiots; "scumbag" seems more to suggest something other than an honest mistake.)
All of this still presupposes that the cable companies are objectivist. That they believe in double blind tests and measurement validity. Do we think they have secretly run double blind tests and decided to not tell us??? ...
 

No, it is not presupposing anything about them.  My posts were responding to the idea of whether or not it is wrong to take advantage of fools, and what one should think of a "scumbag company."  In order for a company to be a "scumbag," it must be that there is something other than an honest mistake that is being made.  If a company that sells worthless products believes their own nonsense, then they are not "scumbags;" they are incompetent fools.  Your introduction of the idea that it is about wires makes no difference; they are "scumbags" only if they are not honest in their business practices.  An incompetent fool is not necessarily a scumbag; the incompetent fool would also have to be dishonest to be a scumbag.

 

If the company is making an honest mistake, then they do not believe that they are taking advantage of fools, and they are not scumbags for making an honest mistake.

 

I suspect that Ketnis was more inclined to impugn the honesty of the company referenced in the opening post rather than their intelligence, and some may have the same inclination with wire companies that make outrageous claims as well.  Of course, in a particular case, it is always possible that that is the wrong choice; it may be that a particular company is run by incompetent fools rather than crooks.  But given the claims about magical wires, one (or both) must be the case with each such company.  Either their intelligence or their honesty is faulty (or both); there is no alternative explanation that can work, given the facts regarding wires. 

 

But the fact that there are two possibilities (actually three, since they can be both incompetent and dishonest) is irrelevant to my posts, as I was responding to posts in which the possibility under discussion was one of dishonesty, not incompetence.  (My question in my first post in this thread is roughly this, is it wrong to be dishonest for financial gain?, though it was a little more personalized, being directed at a particular individual and asking his or her opinion on that question.)

 

 

You are also giving more details than follows from what has been said; they need not believe in double blind tests to know that they are making up BS about their wires; the two ideas are distinct.  If someone knows nothing about a subject, the person may still make up things about it, knowing that one does not know what one is writing about.  One is thereby dishonest, but this does not entail having any beliefs about what the tests are that should be done regarding whatever the topic is that one is writing about.  To use your specific example of people who sell magical wires, someone can start a business selling wires while not knowing anything about them, without knowing what sorts of tests should and should not be done, and can still write up some nonsense about how good they are.  One can lie without knowing the truth, which is a possibility that you seem to have overlooked. 

 

Additionally, if they know that DBTs are necessary for real proof of their claims, it still would not follow that they have bothered doing any of the testing.  If they know what they are doing, they already know their wires will not pass such testing, so there would be no point, and if they don't know what they are doing, they probably have no idea that DBTs are necessary (or even how to properly do such a test).  I would guess that most magical wire companies do not and have not run DBTs of their wires, regardless of whether they are dishonest or incompetent.  Neither person would be likely to run proper tests.  So your assumptions are way off the mark regardless of which sort of company we are discussing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,445 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by spkr  /t/1522269/79-000-raidho-d-3-speake...-reaches-95-db-at-1-meter/0_100#post_24482875

It's amusing to see Mr. Salesman making such posts about fraud business.
 

"Amusing" is one of the words one can use to describe it.
 
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
Top