SIGNALS & NOISE (Letters to Editor) (Nov. 1991)

Won't Get Fooled Again

Dear Editor:

I just got as far as the ad from Lirpa Laboratories (April) and had to write to you. Very clever! I'm sure that, had you included a reader service number, your undercover people at Lirpa-apriL Labs might even have sold some of those marvelous toys.

Dr. Craig Merrell Dallas, Tex.

A Decade of Service

Dear Editor:

I am the owner of a Rega turntable.

Over the past 10 years, I have dealt with Rega Research in England several times. Their customer service department is courteous and informative; their service department is efficient, and easy to deal with. This is a company that not only stands behind their product but goes out of their way to ensure customer satisfaction.

Tom Chadwell; Tustin, Cal.

Editor's Note:

Rega turntables are presently handled in the United States by Music for Others, 113 West Lockwood, St. Louis, Mo. 63119.

Speaking on Tweaking

Dear Editor:

I particularly enjoyed Bert Whyte's essay, "The Urge to Tweak," in the April issue. I'm sure there are many audio enthusiasts who feel, as I do, that the tweak phenomenon has gotten out of hand. Here is the situation as I see it: As Whyte observes, tweaking and related pastimes (such as a pre-occupation with outmoded technologies) are the creation of an audio subculture that many years ago split off from a mainstream they considered overly concerned with scientific objectivity and therefore "dull." At the outset, many people (including myself) found their articles and equipment reviews useful.

But I believe this resulted more from their free indulgence in brand-name comparisons (a practice the mainstream has consistently shied away from) than from any profound observations arising out of their highly touted subjective evaluation approach. Whatever the case, with the passing years, and the steady improvement of audio technology, this subculture now finds itself in the position of being forced to "hear" aural differences that often no longer exist or are simply artifacts of their listening techniques. Thus, to sustain their "philosophy," they have created a fantasy world of preposterous contraptions, sonic will-o'-the-wisps, and pseudoscientific baloney that is unfair to true audiophiles and honest equipment manufacturers alike.

It is true, as Bert Whyte pointed out, that participating in this controversy is part of the fun of being an enthusiast.

On the other hand, for me the fun stops at wasting money on useless products or, worse yet, those that cause damage. I think it is high time for more "dull technologists" to follow Whyte's lead and speak out on the tweak issue.

Stanley L. Freeny; Morristown, N.J.

Keeping an Open Market

Dear Editor:

In the January "Signals & Noise" column, R. H. Coddington complained, in essence, that the hi-fi market has too many speaker manufacturers and models and that this supports inefficient producers and keeps prices high. His position, I guess, is that less choice is more efficient.

I would like to project this scenario: The federal government appoints a Speaker Czar; all speaker companies are eliminated, except one (the Czar's wife's cousin, no doubt); all foreign speaker addicts face jail; maximizing profits for the speaker monopoly is enhanced by discontinuing all R & D, reducing quality control, banning advertisements, killing warranties, cutting back distribution, eliminating product literature, and raising prices.

Have I omitted some items? Don't worry, no government monopoly would. Just keep in mind that no competition means no need to improve a product. Does this nightmare sound familiar?

Mr. Coddington should understand that free markets force lower prices and higher quality goods into the market. Competition fuels the marketplace.

Inefficient speaker companies that produce products at uncompetitive prices and quality can't sell against products that offer more for less cost.

No sales mean no profits, leading to nonexistence. Brands that develop sales and profits succeed. The con sumer dictates the ultimate fate of products.

As to Mr. Coddington's lament about not being able to afford a high-end speaker system: Where is it carved in stone that high-end means only high price? Let this gentleman find a knowledgeable, honest high-end dealer … they abound. This retailer will lead him to a good selection of speakers at price points Mr. Coddington can afford.

Competition between many reputable dealers and high-end products assures us all of wide selection, resulting in hi-fi bliss.

Ken Nelson; Stereophile, Worldwide Yonkers, N.Y.

Headphone Referenced

Dear Editor:

I thoroughly enjoyed Edward M. Long's articles on headphone measurements (April) and was delighted to read his comment that "The only other earphones I would presently consider for use as references are the Etymótic Research ER-1M, which are, at least at present, not available as a production item. They are an in-the-ear type and the most accurate of any I have ever heard." I am happy to report that a production version of these earphones, the ER-4, is now available. It is an all-in-the-ear type with the same diffuse-field-equalized frequency response as the ER-1M but with a slightly higher undistorted output.

By providing some 20 to 30 dB isolation from outside noise, such earphones permit enjoyment of the total dynamic range of recent recordings without requiring ear-shattering reproduction levels to overcome masking by the background noise levels of typical listening environments. They might also avoid the need for the "offset, dual-plate, double-stud 2 x 4-inch partition with two layers of 1/2-inch gypsum" to eliminate furnace noise, as described by Walter G. Jung in his "Signals & Noise" letter appearing in that same issue.

Mead C. Killion, Ph.D. President, Etymótic Research Elk Grove Village, Ill.

(Audio magazine, 11/1991)

= = = =