Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site

The industry mechanism of making shekels on somebody stupidity works like clockwork.

When I last year I was writing my initial article of this thread about Mike Framer, kangaroo and the financial burden that all this industry cheerleading inflict I was very conservative about the estimate of the  Framer-like financial apatite. 2 years ago not-yet-sang-about Continuum was proposing at CES their new TT for sub 50K (after the deals markup). As soon the Framer undertook the company promotion the price went to $96K. I estimated in my initial post that it will be $65K but I was wrong. My apologues for misleading the public…

The story how the Framer got his Continuum TT and how much he paid for it was mysteriously discussed at the number of the sites. I do not know the Truth and I will not speculate. However, I can testify that a number of the manufactures (who produce very expensive products) told me privately that many reviewer get expansive items “for a review” (without paying) and do not return them. It is not the manufactures are is not benefited  -each reviewing whore LOVE to mention what he his new cable elevator that he is reviewing sound extremely good with his Wilson MAXX or to mention any another component from the list of the items that the reviewer DID NOT PAID FOR.) Interesting (and pathetic in the same time) but the reviewers even make money on trading of the reviewed equipment.  I know personally the reviewers who extort components from manufactures, pump them up in their articles, make the prices go up and then sell the component for premium price at used market under the mask of their parties. Then, after the sale, (it might be in year or two) the reviewer return a portion of profit to manufacture (they pay hugely discounted prices). Considering the tend of thousands dollars involved and large number of equipment going thought the hand some of them, believe or not, make a nice supplementary income, sometime 3-figures income.

Anyhow, this post is not about reviewing fantail ethics, which is no different then our dirt in US Congress, be about something else. Many years ago one of the industry heavy player educated me how to ride the fools in audio production. He told me that the “rule of sale” is following: make a big splashy product, create a lot of noise and publicity about it and inject into the consumer minds a notion that the product is “unreachable”. Then introduce to the market a cheap “hoi polloi” model, turning into cash out the publicity around the first “flashy” model. So, to my surprise Caliburn anointed their new “Criterion” turntable at $45K.  (For the readers in the “Their Countries” who read my site let me to explain: the $45.000.00 is a price of INEXPENSIVE turntable in America). Well, this step from the Caliburn was painfully predictable, Also it is predictable the upcoming review from the Mr. Framer… I know each and single work in that review,  you know it too…

Well, I would care less about all that Caliburn saga but there is of something that hidden behind all of it. What is hidden is that Michele Framer with all of his pomposity has very mediocre, close to very bad, sound in his listening room (I have numerous testimonies from visitors who were in his room and some of the things that he writes are very much support those testimonies, I personally never was in his place). So, if the guy has crappy sound in his room (in fact it is how it should be with any freak who shovel equipment like a deck of the cards) then should he be fired as the unqualified person? If you go to a driving school and see an instructor who can’s park a car without hitting a curve or when you see 330 pounds fineness instructor then you recruit him/her or show them the door? I feel that very same in audio. If the person is disabled to get interesting sound, regardless of what he does, then the person should not have rights to open his mouth about audio subjects. Practically it is true if his “lips movement” cost you money, a consumer.

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site