luckylion100 said:
the haters, are self motivated, be it for whatever reason. You are not providing a public service.
I would imagine that if the lies of AVI were so great and misleading Hi-fi Plus, Gramophone and way back What Hi-fi would have openly challenged this but in the reviews I've read it's not even been touched on.
At the end of the day people don't listen to ratings or specs. You don't have to listen to my system, I do... move on, try focusing on some other injustice, it's a pair of bloody speakers!
If a great injustice has been done then the publications mentioned above have failed. I think perhaps though they operate in real world terms more than the haters on here.
I suppose that's my point, in case I wasn't clear.
Hi,
People questioning published facts by AVI does not make them haters. The AVI owners (yourself excluded) have made statements regarding passive systems as broken, or those further up in this thread. They cannot prove their statements, so are just repeating what they are told by, I can only assume, other AVI owners, or AVI staff.
If AVI have misrepresented the facts (such as the amplifier power), then what else have they misrepresented?
It is not the function of the Hifi publications to correct injustices.
The Hifi press will review as seen, and if they happen to include measurements, will report these accurately. I have seen reports where they state the amplifier very much exceeds the stated specification, and others where they state that they only just meet the published specification.
So, if it is the AVI owners who denigrate passive speakers, use AVI published data/facts (which are in error, or are dubious) to claim that the AVI speakers are superior to passive speakers, then I contend that it is not the "haters" of AVI that are the problem, but the AVI owners who are in fact the "haters" of passive systems.
Regards,
Shadders.