2013 best audio marketing of pseudo-science or fictional science...taking nominations now.

[Allan F]

You never told us your qualifications.

 

Jud has qualifications in law, as do I. Unfortunately, you don't know what you are talking about in your Spectral / MIT connection. If Spectral were to say that they won't sell you a Spectral product unless you also buy MIT cables with it at the same time, you could have an issue. Most legal cases are decided on the facts, not the law. As Jud's examples illustrate, the devil is in the details.

[esldude]

I offer the following in support of the MIT nomination. This is a response in an interview by Bruce Brisson about his speaker cable designs.

 

On the speaker cables, the first switch allows you to play in either standard definition, high definition, or super-high definition. In the super-high definition we do one more thing, which is reducing analog jitter within the cable down to 2.8 microseconds. After reading some scientific information on jitter that suggested we could hear

jitter between our right ear and our left ear down to 2.8 microseconds I became fascinated. I’ve got to find out why, right? These things control me; I don’t control them.

 

So I go on the hunt using a novel device developed by Hewlett-Packard called an interval analyzer. I began to look at different cables and listen. This is what you’ve got to do in this business—measure, listen, measure, listen, measure, listen, then send it out for listening to different beta sites. I went to work on the project—it was about a two-and-a-half-year project—and what I found was exactly what I thought. Jitter affected spatial qualities. But more than that, and I was bowled over by this, was that it affected timbre to such a degree in the lower frequencies. We found that reducing jitter made things sound much more natural and dense. I think the term "dense" is something that your readers will identify with. This all extends from the fact that audiophiles can’t control the rhythm, the beat, the general pace of the music, but what they do tend to try to control is timbre and spatial qualities in

their systems.

 

With the SHD line we bring that all together and it manifests itself as accurate timbre and also an accurate soundstage. Within the soundstage you have large images. Within the large images you have smaller micro-images. You have micro-level details like backwashes off one wall, the right wall, not the left wall. When you control jitter, all of those things, particularly that backwash off just one wall, become very, very apparent.

[Jud]

Isn't that classic tying. No MIT, no warranty.

 

No, it really isn't. There are lots of reasons why not, several of which have already been mentioned. Since Eloise and two lawyers have given you good reasons why it wouldn't be an antitrust violation, supposing you cite us some case law or a law review article on point (i.e., the same factual situation) as to why it would be.

[Jud]

This is a response in an interview by Bruce Brisson about his speaker cable designs.

 

On the speaker cables, the first switch allows you to play in either standard definition, high definition, or super-high definition. In the super-high definition we do one more thing, which is reducing analog jitter within the cable down to 2.8 microseconds. After reading some scientific information on jitter that suggested we could hear

jitter between our right ear and our left ear down to 2.8 microseconds I became fascinated. I’ve got to find out why, right? These things control me; I don’t control them.

 

So I go on the hunt using a novel device developed by Hewlett-Packard called an interval analyzer. I began to look at different cables and listen. This is what you’ve got to do in this business—measure, listen, measure, listen, measure, listen, then send it out for listening to different beta sites. I went to work on the project—it was about a two-and-a-half-year project—and what I found was exactly what I thought. Jitter affected spatial qualities. But more than that, and I was bowled over by this, was that it affected timbre to such a degree in the lower frequencies. We found that reducing jitter made things sound much more natural and dense. I think the term "dense" is something that your readers will identify with. This all extends from the fact that audiophiles can’t control the rhythm, the beat, the general pace of the music, but what they do tend to try to control is timbre and spatial qualities in

their systems.

 

Should have been a clue?

[Audio_ELF]

Isn't that classic tying. No MIT, no warranty.

Out of interest, are they saying but MIT cables, or buy these cables from us which MIT manufacture?

 

Subtle but distinct difference.

 

The later is no different really than the numerous manufacturers who say only our own brand power supplies should be used (no warranty otherwise).

 

Eloise

[VandyMan]

People would think the Massachusetts university had a sideline selling audio cables in California?

 

I worked at a company that was based on technology developed at Stanford and exclusively licensed from them, so it does not seem too far fetched to me that MIT Cables would be related to MIT the school. Certainly they knew the potential for confusion when they named their company and choose to refer to it in all their marketing by the acronym.

[NOMBEDES]

In the US we can not even buy chicken that is safe to eat. Why should we expect to our cables to be certified "snake oil free'?

 

I would rather have uncontaminated chicken!

[esldude]

I am no lawyer and no nothing of the legality of what Spectral does. But this is from their website:

 

 

MH-750 Ultralinear CVTerminator Series II Speaker Interface • This specialized interface includes MIT Terminator technology optimized for the ultralinear, high-speed requirements of Spectral components, and provides increased clarity, more natural image focus and improved low-frequency weight and extension. Spectral amplifiers are not warranted for use with speaker cables other than MIT. The 750 Ultralinear CVTerminator Series II represents the basic speaker cable requirement for Spectral amplifiers.

 

 

 

 

Now they do offer as Jud said Universal versions. Maybe it is something like a Ferrari requiring the use of Z rated tires. Or least Spectral would see it that way.

[Allan F]

I worked at a company that was based on technology developed at Stanford and exclusively licensed from them, so it does not seem too far fetched to me that MIT Cables would be related to MIT the school. Certainly they knew the potential for confusion when they named their company and choose to refer to it in all their marketing by the acronym.

 

What you say is probably true but no legal issue is raised by the suggestion. If MIT cables were also to offer courses in engineering, for example, then the lawyers would have a field day.

[Allan F]

A spectral purchase includes the warranty. Since unless you buy MIT cables you don't get a warranty, that means without MIT cables, they are not selling you the complete product. That sounds like tying.When I was a VC in the valley, we would never allow any of our companies to play these sorts of games.

 

It's not tying if there is a sound technical reason for it and you are made aware of it before purchase. (no pun intended)

 

As to your other point, it is an honourable and probably wise course to follow. But, discreditable and/or unethical practices are not necessarily illegal.

[VandyMan]

What you say is probably true but no legal issue is raised by the suggestion. If MIT cables were also to offer courses in engineering, for example, then the lawyers would have a field day.

 

I agree, but the original point someone made was that the name comes across as a way for them to give their cable company the high tech engineering luster of the University. That is how it strikes me too.

[Allan F]

Fractional Articulation Technology - FAT! Gaah, I know.

 

Reminds me of musicians who talk about Guitar Acquisition Syndrome, the only cure for which is Frequent Application of Retail Therapy.

[Jud]

A spectral purchase includes the warranty. Since unless you buy MIT cables you don't get a warranty, that means without MIT cables, they are not selling you the complete product. That sounds like tying. Its true these are penny ante nickel and dime companies, they are below the radar so they won't get caught, but it still sound like like tying.

 

So a company that voids the warranty if you bypass one of their fuses with your own is guilty of illegal tying?

 

One more time: If there is a legitimate technical reason to make the warranty on item A dependent on the use of it only with item B, then the requirement is not illegal tying. Thus if Spectral has a legitimate technical concern that their amplifiers may go into oscillation if not used with MIT cables, and thus damage the amplifiers, and has determined this is a risk they are not prepared to cover under warranty, this is legitimate, effective risk management by Spectral, nothing illegal about it. Are you getting the idea?

 

When I was a VC in the valley, we would never allow any of our companies to play these sorts of games.

 

You would never allow any of your companies to do effective risk management? So all of your companies had completely unlimited warranties on all of their products, no matter the misuse by customers?

 

Yes, I see your VC experience has made you quite the legal expert.

[Allan F]

No, I just read the posts rather than assuming people mean things they aren't saying!

 

I do agree that some of Dennis' posts can read quite inflammatory.

 

Now, I understand. Inflammatory is different from belittling or insulting in your lexicon!

[esldude]

Now, I understand. Inflammatory is different from belittling or insulting in your lexicon!

 

Eloise can speak for her self of course.

 

But yes, while belittling or insulting would usually be inflammatory one can be inflammatory without doing either of those.

[Audio_ELF]

Now, I understand. Inflammatory is different from belittling or insulting in your lexicon!

Inflammatory would be something designed to illicit a response.

 

Belittling would be resorting to personal insults when the response isn't what you desired!

[Paul R]

So? Don't buy from them. It is not like they hold some kind of monopoly on audio amplifiers you know.

 

 

First, the correct use of an audio power amplifier is to that a pair of wires and connect it to a speaker system. I don't know of any other amplifier vendor that requires a specific brand of cable. If they said, "this is the load that must be presented" that's one thing. But they say the only load that acceptable load must be purchased from MIT, that's another. As for their oscillation damage claim, I don't believe it. First, its difficult to find a designer so incompetent as to produce a design so unstable. I'd like to see the agreements and correspondence, and you know they exist, between Spectral and MIT (the cable thieves, not the university). I'd like to understand the financial arrangements that are the basis for the warrantee requirement.

 

As for risk management, no one I know would release a product that fails because its subjected to ordinary and standard usage.

[Allan F]

Inflammatory would be something designed to illicit a response.

 

Belittling would be resorting to personal insults when the response isn't what you desired!

 

Resorting to personal insults when the response isn't what you desired isn't designed to illicit a response, despite the fact that it almost inevitably leads to that. Okay, I get it now.

[Audio_ELF]

Let me see if I get it. Resorting to personal insults when the response isn't what you desired isn't designed to illicit a response, although it almost inevitably leads to that.

No you're missing it...

 

An inflammatory post would be along the lines of posting on a Ford forum "General Motors make the best cars ever".

 

A belittling post would be "you drive so slow you wouldn't know the thrill that can be had from driving a GM car".

 

At the end of the day (in reminder of what I was saying in the first place) I do not see that see a post which (in reply) says "what you are saying makes no logical sense and for it to be true several well tested scientific theories would have to be ignored" to be insulting or belittling though it could be inflammatory if the poster knows that the subjective opinion will be defended strongly! And if the response includes the terms "expectation bias"; "blind test" or "measurement" then it's definitely inflammatory especially if the original poster is known to find such questions and testing methods to be counterproductive; but still not belittling...

 

Eloise

[esldude]

Ferrari doesn't care about who makes those Z rated tire, only that they are Z rated.

 

That is true, but I was in on a phone conversation between a dealer and Rick Fryer a few years back. It was in regard to cabling on the Spectrals. The dealer was told two other brands they would approve of. I don't remember what they were, I am thinking one was Transparent. So they did apparently mainly want cables with some interface box on them unless they had some sort of secret deal with both companies.

[Jud]

First, the correct use of an audio power amplifier is to that a pair of wires and connect it to a speaker system. I don't know of any other amplifier vendor that requires a specific brand of cable. If they said, "this is the load that must be presented" that's one thing. But they say the only load that acceptable load must be purchased from MIT, that's another. As for their oscillation damage claim, I don't believe it. First, its difficult to find a designer so incompetent as to produce a design so unstable. I'd like to see the agreements and correspondence, and you know they exist, between Spectral and MIT (the cable thieves, not the university). I'd like to understand the financial arrangements that are the basis for the warrantee requirement.

 

As for risk management, no one I know would release a product that fails because its subjected to ordinary and standard usage.

 

So you know more antitrust law than the lawyers, and more about the correct design of amplifiers than Keith Johnson.

 

My admiration for you at this point is so unbounded I think I'll quit now before it becomes overwhelming.

[Jud]

And I trust the partners at Wilson Sonsini more than I trust you.

 

Absolutely. I would too. But you didn't ask them about whether this Spectral/MIT arrangement was illegal tying, did you?

 

Big companies can try to see what they can get away with, small companies and start ups can't. In many ways Spectral is a failed start up.

 

By your own "logic" then, Spectral was not trying to see what it could get away with. So I guess that means they must have had a good reason for their requirement rather than trying to get away with an illegal tying arrangement.

 

After 35 years, they are sill a hand full of people in a thinly capitalized company with maybe a million or two in revenue and the two key players are at best septuagenarians. We would have liquidated them years ago.

 

Exactly. Not what anyone would call monopolistic behavior of the type the antitrust laws would reach, is it? Here, check this out (from some pretty good lawyers whose work you might even trust): http://media.straffordpub.com/products/tying-arrangements-avoiding-antitrust-liability-2012-05-01/presentation.pdf

 

I call your particular attention to the last two bullets on page 13 -

 

• The seller has sufficient economic power in the market for the tying product to enable it to restrain trade in the market for the tied product

• A not insubstantial amount of interstate commerce is affected

 

By your own description of Spectral, I'd say any attempt to show these two elements in relation to Spectral's requirement of MIT cables to claim warranty protection would get a judge laughing pretty good.

[wgscott]

I'm not an attorney, but it seems like a simple consumer fraud case would be more straightforward. Audiophiles are unique, however, in their spirited defense of their right to be ripped off blind.

[Allan F]

Since you're a lawyer, your job is to be able argue both sides, make the tying case.

 

A good lawyer knows when to tell his client that he has no case, saving the client considerable sums of money and wasted time and energy. While a lawyer may be able to prepare arguments for both sides of an issue, his client's reasonable prospects for success may be clear to him, and he should advise the client accordingly. The client, of course, may always seek another opinion.

[sandyk]

Audiophiles are unique, however, in their spirited defense of their right to be ripped off blind.

 

Interesting new avatar from WGS, but perhaps the one at the link matches better ?

 

TAILPIECE (OR THE ONE-EYED CAT WALKING BACKWARDS) by DON GRANT - original artwork for sale | Chris Beetles