Copyright © 1998
Cadman Enterprises Ltd
Welcome to the Graham Slee Audio Products Owners Forum Open to all owners plus those contemplating the purchase of a Graham Slee HiFi System Components audio product and wishing to use this forum's loaner program: join here (Rules on posting can be found here) This website along with trade marks Graham Slee and HiFi System Components are owned by Cadman Enterprises Ltd |
Correcting Michael Fremer |
Post Reply | Page <123 |
Author | |
patientot
Senior Member Joined: 28 Nov 2018 Location: USA Status: Offline Points: 1523 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
This is a bit of a side point, so apologies if it doesn't belong here. Feel free to move it to a different topic if necessary.
At any rate, one thing I have noticed about Fremer lately is that he often very lazy and fails to do basic due diligence before writing up reviews on records and equipment. If he were a random blogger or forum enthusiast that would be one thing, but he is supposedly an industry professional and is held up as some kind of guru. As an example, recently he posted a review of a record reissue where he goes into speculation about sourcing and whether the record is truly all analog mastered or not. Why bother with that if you are a professional? Take two minutes and fire off an email to the mastering engineer and/or label and get some straight answers. If I, as a regular person can do that, so can you, and as a professional that's what I expect. If Fremer got no answer, then he should say so. As readers we are left to assume he didn't take two minutes to do that and is just lazy or haphazard in his reviews. Yet again, he is the "professional", the "guru" and the "arbiter of quality" we are all supposed to listen to. What a joke, IMHO.
Edited by patientot - 12 Jul 2019 at 4:39pm |
|
SL-1200 MK7 (modified) + Reflex M + PSU-1 used with AT150-40ML, AT VM95ML, Stanton 680mkII + Ogura, and Shure M35X cartridges.
|
|
Fatmangolf
Moderator Group Joined: 23 Dec 2009 Location: Middlesbrough Status: Offline Points: 8960 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The only suggestion to MF I would make is that the US Patent Office has confirmed the GS approach is new. It is interesting that his approach is to seek an opinion to dispute.
|
|
Jon
Open mind and ears whilst owning GSP Genera, Accession M, Accession MC, Elevator EXP, Solo ULDE, Proprius amps, Cusat50 cables, Lautus digital cable, Spatia cables and links, and a Majestic DAC. |
|
John1479
Senior Member Joined: 05 Jun 2019 Location: Sheffield Status: Offline Points: 121 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I can assure you that the US Patent was a dominant feature of my argument sent to MF. On Monday 17th June, I wrote in response to an earlier email from MF:- "No reference to the Patent. Unique technology. Who else in recent times has been awarded a US Patent for demonstrable improvement in high fidelity audio ?" MF replied :- "Patents are not granted based on “audio quality”." No mention of Unique technology from MF. The only further reference to the Patent was as follows:- "The link you sent was to Slee's patent application not to his actual patent. His actual patent references a patent application made by Channel D's Rob Robinson, who applied for a patent related to "flat" response. Robinson is reviewing the patent." The link referred to is:- Edit to correct font size and clarify email correspondence extracts Edited by John1479 - 12 Jul 2019 at 10:26pm |
|
Aussie Mick
Senior Member Joined: 21 Feb 2014 Location: Bendigo Aust. Status: Offline Points: 1091 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
When presented with an idea one has not encountered, or which runs contrary to received wisdom, one has two options.
1. “Well that’s not what I expected. I’d better check that out and see if there’s anything to it, so that I know I understand before passing comment or judgment.” 2. “That’s different to everything I know. Must be wrong” Perhaps some people in positions of influence just fall into the second category. Mick.
|
|
Rega RP8 - Apheta 2 - Accession MC Enigma PS -Solo ULDE (Focal Utopia) - PS Audio M700 - Fical Kanta No2
|
|
John1479
Senior Member Joined: 05 Jun 2019 Location: Sheffield Status: Offline Points: 121 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
Extract from my original email sent to MF. He made no direct reference to this in his replies, completely ignored. The subsequent comments noted in my previous post were in a frustrated attempt to provoke an answer to this point.
Sent to MF 17th June "Absolutely no mention of the hard won and highly valued US Patent..... Pub. No.: US 2017/0126186A1 Why no mention? Seriously; Why not? The innovative technology has been granted a patent. It's only reasonable to assume that the US Patents Office consulted experts on this? Not good enough? It seems to me this irrefutable innovation was deliberately omitted from the review and one must ask why? " |
|
Post Reply | Page <123 |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |