Dear Srajan, I just caught up with your latest LessLoss comments on the heels of Dawid's formal review. I appreciate the likely discomfort you must have felt reporting on effects that live on the outer fringes of our hobby but as you kept reminding us throughout, you volunteered for this so must welcome whatever fallout results. I found it curious that Dawid's review touched on none of it nor did Mr. Motek send him a super lengthy manufacturer's reply encouraging other types of experiments. It's as though he needed a participant who willingly signed up to dig deeper before he spilled the beans of already having made his own such experiments with a small focus group of friends and relatives. I also find myself agreeing with your running subtext on cost. These devices aren't exactly affordable and if it takes as many as the reply of Louis suggests to activate other areas, they quickly price themselves well out of contention for folks like myself and apparently, you too. Should that disqualify them from thoughtful discourse though? You clearly didn't think so and I for one am glad for it. Though I'm not a target customer for this product, I still enjoyed learning about it and as Louis suggested, who knows where this first iteration might lead? If it does lead somewhere interesting and more universally attainable, you will be able to look back and say that you played a part in giving it some exposure. André
What fallout. André? Unlike John Darko who diligently polices his YouTube comments lest a few rotten apples spoil the useful bunch, I have no interactive comments. People with a real axe to grind or just the need to make a momentary flip comment rarely take the time to email me separately. Too much effort. Even if they do and are disrespectful or offensive, I delete their email and blacklist the sender. Like school-yard bullies stood up to, that immediately sends them elsewhere. If reviews such as this one create fallout elsewhere, I don't frequent those places. Where I'm concerned, they simply shoot blanks. Getting hit by direct emails has become exceedingly rare so no worries on that count. If and when it happens, that's simply part of my job. Critics get themselves critiqued. If we can't stand that heat, we ought to stay out of the kitchen. As to Louis perhaps playing it a bit coy without a formal invite to detour from the tried 'n' true' might be so but is understandable if you don't want to alienate your core audience. Fake news show how perception becomes reality. If people think you're a thief, they'll treat you as one, no proof necessary. If they think you're a huckster selling snake oil, they'll write you off, no proof necessary. Just enough other people saying so will suffice and sales tank.
It's very basic psychology but no less potent for it. It's why some manufacturers keep certain claims to an absolute minimum. They prefer for their customers to give such feedback. Apparently my platform and approach had Louis feel safe enough to 'come out' about the Giant Steps' ancillary benefits. But then I call my site 6moons and not The Abso!ute Sound. You might say that I deliberately leave that door a good crack open. And yes, I do love an angle other than just writing about toys for nerdy rich boys—which is to what much costly hifi amounts—to feel that what I do for a living has some meaning. Most of that comes from supporting smaller and/or newer brands where early exposure can still make big differences to the people behind them. The same amount of personal effort expended on a new Harman model does nothing at all. If occasionally my coverage opens doors to unusual products with potential benefits beyond just the audible, that's an extra bonus. As I recently wrote, it can't always be about DACs, amps and speakers. It could of course; but must it? For me, more variety is better. Meanwhile our readers get to pick and choose which content appeals to them; and what to avoid. It's all super basic but works. I like things that work; the more basic the better. Srajan
