Oh come on What Hi-Fi

admin_exported

New member
Aug 10, 2019
2,556
4
0
Visit site
Sorry, but you really do need to brush up your act where accuracy of your reviews are concerned.

January 2010 issue, page 55, review of Cyrus CD6se, Cyrus 6XP and Dynaudio Focus 110.
You have placed a boxout in the lower-right of the page entitled "Instant upgrade".
This informs us that a good upgrade for both the Cyrus CD6se and 6XP would be to add a PSX-R PSU to each. There's just one slight problem here - neither the CD6se nor the 6XP are capable of having a PSX-R connected to them!

And no mention of how you got on with the re-design of the slot whilst using the 6se?
 

Ketan Bharadia

New member
Jun 7, 2007
44
0
0
Visit site
Hi Quenzer,
Yes you are right. The PSX-R can't be added to 6 series components. These need to be upgraded to 8 series first.
The new slot trim on the CD player works fine and looks neater.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Quenzer:Sorry, but you really do need to brush up your act where accuracy of your reviews are concerned.

Ok, everyone's perfect. Chill out, baby.
emotion-1.gif
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Graham_Thomas:Ok, everyone's perfect. Chill out, baby.
emotion-1.gif

Yes of course, we will all make mistakes, that's a given.

However, how long is it that What Hi-Fi have been reviewing Cyrus products? Well it's long enough for them to know very well that the 6 series does not have the ability to add PSX-R.

It took time and thought to place the "Instant upgrade" boxout on that page. Such an error can't be dismissed so easily. Purchasers may go out and buy a 6se or 6xp on the thought that they can add a PSX-R to it at a later date, which, as we have already established, is not possible. This kind of thing is serious in my opinion as it could cost the end user a lot of money and inconvenience.
 

Scissor_digits

New member
Dec 16, 2003
51
0
0
Visit site
I'm in total agreement with Quenzer on this one and am looking forward to an explanation for this editorial faux par. As errors go this one is a biggy.
 

Clare Newsome

New member
Jun 4, 2007
1,657
0
0
Visit site
This faux pas was acknowledged by Ketan earlier in the thread. Unintentional error caused by a longer piece being wrongly sub-edited down. These mistakes can happen, especially when the production team are working on the biggest issue of the year. Apologies for any confusion.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Scissor_digits:I'm in total agreement with Quenzer on this one and am looking forward to an explanation for this editorial faux par. As errors go this one is a biggy.

The world's best bankers made worse errors, and they are all getting massive bonuses shortly
 

TRENDING THREADS