[McMadface]

Everybody chill. You can file a lawsuit against anyone for literally anything. It doesn't mean that there is any shred of truth in it. Innocent until proven guilty, remember?

The current filing with the US International Trade Commission, an administrative and not judicial body, is seeking an injunction against the alleged infringing BAs from entering the US. The complaint does not allege any wrongdoing on the part of CFA, only against Bellsing.

I know we all like to jump to conclusions, but let's save the pitchforks for the time when something has actually been proven.

 

[nuggetbro]

I love my andromeda's but I am a little jealous of the golds extra bass, which I think I would really enjoy (anyone in Sydney wanna meet up to let me try them )

After the limited run of the gold, do you think CA will add a more permanent option to its range?

 

[AutumnCrown]

Everybody chill. You can file a lawsuit against anyone for literally anything. It doesn't mean that there is any shred of truth in it. Innocent until proven guilty, remember?

I think that CA IEMs opting for cheaper knockoff BA's is proven by the "preponderance" of evidence standard at this point, as it was explicitly stated in the legal filing that this was the case. It is not proven that this apparent attempt at raising profit margins was responsible for the alleged unit variation issues, but it likely never will be, unless CA comes out and says it, but the fact that I could possibly be wrong won't stop me and others from speculating, and it shouldn't. The hifi community isn't a court of law, and it shouldn't act like one. As consumers we don't have the power to investigate and administer punishments upon companies who act unethically or against our own values in the way courts do. The best we can do is speculate and make decisions based on the limited information we have.

 

[nuggetbro]

I think that CA IEMs opting for cheaper knockoff BA's is proven by the "preponderance" of evidence standard at this point, as it was explicitly stated in the legal filing that this was the case. It is not proven that this apparent attempt at raising profit margins was responsible for the alleged unit variation issues, but it likely never will be, unless CA comes out and says it, but the fact that I could possibly be wrong won't stop me and others from speculating, and it shouldn't. The hifi community isn't a court of law, and it shouldn't act like one. As consumers we don't have the power to investigate and administer punishments upon companies who act unethically or against our own values in the way courts do. The best we can do is speculate and make decisions based on the limited information we have.

Off subject for a second, but you say it was done to raise profits. If there evidence that it was cheaper? Also, do they sound different? From the many reviews I have gone through, the campfires sound pretty good. I know that is tuning as well, but it would have to start with pretty good hardware first right?

Maybe only campfire can answer the questions, but mostly I am just curious what the community things from the technical standpoint.

 

[robulation]

I think that CA IEMs opting for cheaper knockoff BA's is proven by the "preponderance" of evidence standard at this point, as it was explicitly stated in the legal filing that this was the case. It is not proven that this apparent attempt at raising profit margins was responsible for the alleged unit variation issues, but it likely never will be, unless CA comes out and says it, but the fact that I could possibly be wrong won't stop me and others from speculating, and it shouldn't. The hifi community isn't a court of law, and it shouldn't act like one. As consumers we don't have the power to investigate and administer punishments upon companies who act unethically or against our own values in the way courts do. The best we can do is speculate and make decisions based on the limited information we have.

This whole thing is just ridiculous... it’s the way business works. It just so happens that an equally competent BA manufacturer has created something that may or may not be the same technology or similar as Knowles. It may or may not be that disillusioned employees of Knowles have created their own company, and made a product that is as good as Knowles from the experience that they have garnered in the world of sound. It may or may not have similar components. BUT it has NOTHING to do with fakes, nothing to do with being cheap, There are so many companies that do this, and it’s always the larger, more expensive and more cut-throat companies trying to send the small ones down by any means possible. CA have nothing to own up to, other than in an attempt to cut down on margins, they’ve simply opted for a BA system that fits their requirements. Pipe down people.

 

[AutumnCrown]

CA have nothing to own up to, other than in an attempt to cut down on margins, they’ve simply opted for a BA system that fits their requirements. Pipe down people.

I've just about said my piece and I don't want a full on flame war, so I will try to leave the conversation on a conciliatory note. Whether or not the allegations and rumors are offensive to your own sensibilities as a consumer is your own business and prerogative. Personally I love my Andromedas, and at the same time I find the allegedly stolen IP situation to be ethically troubling. I don't want to have a situation where companies don't bother to do R&D because it will just end up getting stolen and sold at a tenth of the cost by a foreign company. I think the entire audiophile community would be hurt by this, and we should therefore support the enforcement of copyright laws if we want such research to continue. I also think companies that purchase these knockoffs should not do so if they realize they are buying the fruits of stolen IP. It is fine for companies to cut costs where they can, if performance is not significantly impacted. Regardless of the situation here, I fully expect that these things will be resolved to the benefit of the consumer eventually, and I will be happy to support any company that acknowledges its errors going forward.

 

[McMadface]

I think that CA IEMs opting for cheaper knockoff BA's is proven by the "preponderance" of evidence standard at this point, as it was explicitly stated in the legal filing that this was the case.

A Complaint is a document where a party files its accusations against another party. I could file a Complaint stating that AutumnCrown has a third ear on his chest. Nothing is proven by filing a Complaint.

This is why everyone needs to chill, especially if you have no understanding of our legal system. Here's a good article as to what is going on procedurally: https://corporate.findlaw.com/intel...erview-of-section-337-actions-in-the-itc.html

 

[robulation]

I've just about said my piece and I don't want a full on flame war, so I will try to leave the conversation on a conciliatory note. Whether or not the allegations and rumors are offensive to your own sensibilities as a consumer is your own business and prerogative. Personally I love my Andromedas, and at the same time I find the allegedly stolen IP situation to be ethically troubling. I don't want to have a situation where companies don't bother to do R&A because it will just end up getting stolen and sold at a tenth of the cost by a foreign company. I think the entire audiophile community would be hurt by this, and we should therefore support the enforcement of copyright laws if we want such research to continue. I also think companies that purchase these knockoffs should not do so if they realize they are buying the fruits of stolen IP. It is fine for companies to cut costs where they can, if performance is not significantly impacted. Regardless of the situation here, I fully expect that these things will be resolved to the benefit of the consumer eventually, and I will be happy to support any company that acknowledges its errors going forward.

I just think your specific wording is slightly heavy-handed. It suggests ‘inferior’, when in this case it sounds like it probably isn’t. It’s called competition, and technology thrives on it. The quality of the sound that comes from these products is certainly not ‘knock-off’ and their pairing and QC is very very good, in my experience. I feel this is no different to someone who works for Ferrari on something tech-specific for years, moving to a vehicle startup company to stretch their wings and offer a similar technology, and then Ferrari sue in a desperate attempt to close their doors. It’s happened with start-ups the world over... and it’s certainly nothing to do with fakery.

 

[frolly]

I just think your specific wording is slightly heavy-handed. It suggests ‘inferior’, when in this case it sounds like it probably isn’t. It’s called competition, and technology thrives on it. The quality of the sound that comes from these products is certainly not ‘knock-off’ and their pairing and QC is very very good, in my experience. I feel this is no different to someone who works for Ferrari on something tech-specific for years, moving to a vehicle startup company to stretch their wings and offer a similar technology, and then Ferrari sue in a desperate attempt to close their doors. It’s happened with start-ups the world over... and it’s certainly nothing to do with fakery.

Just to clarify, former Knowles employees now working for Bellsing are accused of stealing technology, designs and proprietary equipment while still working for Knowles. If true, that would be illegal and not just a matter of taking their experience to another company after they part ways. Imagine a current CA employee taking the Andromeda design and starting another company with it.

 

[robulation]

Just to clarify, former Knowles employees now working for Bellsing are accused of stealing technology, designs and proprietary equipment while still working for Knowles. If true, that would be illegal and not just a matter of taking their experience to another company after they part ways. Imagine a current CA employee taking the Andromeda design and starting another company with it.

It’s exactly that though... just accusations right now. And I understand what you’re saying... just depends whether they are cheap knock-offs, or standalone competitors.

 

[FastAndClean]

Andromeda is clean, Knowles drivers
HODVTEC-31618/ BK-26824, TWFK-30017.

 

[NewEve]

Andromeda is clean, Knowles drivers
HODVTEC-31618/ BK-26824, TWFK-30017.

F e a r l e s s

 

[NewEve]

MajorHifi’s review of the Andromeda Special Edition Gold is out

 

[Aliv3]

Has anyone tested the andromeda gold with the wm1a?

 

[IxIIxI]

Hi, I am new here and I just want to share what I experienced recently.

I got the Andromeda Gold about a week ago, then realised I need a better DAP.......

I was told the low impedance of the Gold can be tricky and I can tell you it doesn't sound nice with the average gears I already have (AK XB10 and iphone 6s). Funny enough, my CA Comet sounds better than the Gold with the XB10 and iphone 6s, I recon it must be due to the high output impedance of my sources. The Gold just sound "thin" and not much low end with this setup.

Anyway, I went shopping for a DAP with specific aim to match it with the Gold, particularly looking for a DAP with output impedance of 0.8 ohms or below. I am sticking with iphone and I need Tidal streaming and off line, so it rules out the Sony and a few other options. I also want to stick with 3.5mm for the time being to keep things simple and keep the cost under control.

I have my eyes set on the AK SP1000m but I was not sure about its OI of 2 ohms and how it match with the Gold. I was intrigued by the iBasso DX220 due to its low OI of 0.3 ohms for the stock AMP1ii module (and even their AMP9 tube module has low OI of 0.3 ohms which is great for future upgrade). I A/B the iBasso with AK SR15 (I really like its small size but it 't only sounds a bit better than my XB10/iphone 6s combo). Then I A/B the iBasso with the AK-SP1000m in the same shop and to my surprise, the Gold with the iBasso DX220 sounds better to my taste than with the SP1000m . The DX220 makes the music more energetic and emotional (e.g. Bon Jovi - Living on a prayer streaming via Tidal in Master quality really have me tapping my feet), while the SP1000m playing the same song is smoother and a bit lay back, it is MUCH nicer than SR15 (as expected right?). The bass of the Gold with DX220 was so strong and the shop recommend me to swap the Final Type E tips (comes with the Gold) to AZLA Sednam which has a larger opening, this simple change of tips make the sound more balance for me.

I was prepared to bite the bullet and get the SP1000m if it sounds good with the Gold but it doesn't, at least to my ears and my music preference. What baffle (or enlightened) me is that the SP1000m is generally regarded to be better sounding than the DX220. Perhaps the low impedance of the Gold is really a critical factor?

I now got the DX220 and I am in the process of burning-in the DAP