[tomb]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClieOS /img/forum/go_quote.gif Here is a question from me: Why would Skullcandy claims to produce the industry first vibrating headphone (Skullcrashers) when it is known that Panasonic starts selling headphone of similar function (VMSS series) since early/mid 90s? (Headwize even has a picture of the RP-HT970) I hope he has some really good reason.

XXX-Bass or something like that. I had one - still do, except the PCDP player went bust. Nice little sports player, too - clad in metal. The headphones were pretty cool - banded earbuds with a back of the neck headband that shook like a Nintendo controller vibrator. Some of the best bass from a headphone I ever felt.

 

[WiredMonk]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ericj /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well if there's somewhere i can audition this lowrider, I'd be glad to put it up against a $6 Coby CV-130 w/ no-donut mod. I figure it'd be a fair fight.

Well, I'm auditioning them as I speak. If anyone wants to send me one of these 'Cobys' I'd be happy to do an unbiased test on myself or some other guinea pig.

Quote:

The point i was making was about, for lack of a more apt term, karma.

Ah, the old 'guilt by association fallacy'.

 

[Nagasaki_Kid]

why would anyone mail a $6 coby the postage would cost more than the cobys.

 

[wnmnkh]

ask him if his company ever has a plan to make decent headphones as good as Philips SHC1000 (forgot the exact name).

 

[pez]

Guys enough with the SC bashing. Yes they make some pretty bad clames, but overall they have had a few decent pairs come our way. This question was to be serious about asking the CEO questions, not to bash his products on a forum. Let's be more mature about this, eh? We're all mature boy, girls, men and women, right? But I do have a question. The original Smokin' Buds were actually a somewhat decent pair of canal phones and were definitely worth the $10 clearance price I always found them at. Ask him if they have done anything to fix the failure rate in the "original" Smokin' Buds.

Thanks
-Pez

 

[Nagasaki_Kid]

ask if they would release stickers or kits to make other headphone look cool

 

[WiredMonk]

Assuming that was a serious question and not sarcastic, you actually can order free Skullcandy stickers from them on their website. Check out the FAQs for more directions

 

[Televator]

...and you can find bullets in a lot of places in the US

 

[Jon118]

Ask him if he's ever listened to Grados. Especially the SR-60 since it is right in line with the pricing on a lot of his products. If he hasn't heard something like that it might do him good from other people's descriptions of their headphones. Plus I definitely like Grado's styling better.

 

[kpeezy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pez /img/forum/go_quote.gif Guys enough with the SC bashing. Yes they make some pretty bad clames, but overall they have had a few decent pairs come our way. This question was to be serious about asking the CEO questions, not to bash his products on a forum. Let's be more mature about this, eh? We're all mature boy, girls, men and women, right? But I do have a question. The original Smokin' Buds were actually a somewhat decent pair of canal phones and were definitely worth the $10 clearance price I always found them at. Ask him if they have done anything to fix the failure rate in the "original" Smokin' Buds. Thanks -Pez

x2 - I'm sure you all feel very clever with your Skull Candy bash posts, but you're not.

 

[luckypictures]

If you're really not a fan, feel free to pass them my way, I've been dying to try out the phones. Most of the music I listen to 90% of people haven't heard of, and I think they'd work for it. Hahhaha.

But really, the watches are a good idea. And if the CEO has no concern with SQ, then he's doing just fine. But if he is concerned with sound quality, ask him what type of headphones he's used? Would he be open to trying out GOOD headphones, and putting thought into changing the driver design. There's no reason to not have the marketability they have, and good sound quality.

Ask him if he is aware of Head-Fi. There are some valid suggestions here.

 

[ericj]

Quote:

Originally Posted by WiredMonk /img/forum/go_quote.gif Ah, the old 'guilt by association fallacy'.

Not a very apt application of that axe.

Branding supercedes association. It's more like a prejudice of guilt by familiarity with the perp's conviction record.

Or an unwillingness to wear Insane Clown Possee regalia even if they start making Really Nice juggalo shirts. And for the exact same reasons.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kpeezy /img/forum/go_quote.gif x2 - I'm sure you all feel very clever with your Skull Candy bash posts, but you're not.

I'm actually not trying that hard. And i actually think the harsh criticism is fair game.

This is a company that's gone out of their way to make outlandish and verifiably false claims. They overtly whore up their marketing to appeal to specific youth groups.

When someone's going balls-out, I figure i have every right to call 'em on it.

 

[VolkswagenFox]

I googled "Skullcandy sucks" just for the hell of it and found this rather amusing quote:

"skullcandy sucks, my bud has the camo ones, those things are gay, and they are huge. Get bose. those are the best, but obviously they are expensive!"

Cracked me up.

 

[jesse_w]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ericj /img/forum/go_quote.gif Not a very apt application of that axe. Branding supercedes association. It's more like a prejudice of guilt by familiarity with the perp's conviction record. Or an unwillingness to wear Insane Clown Possee regalia even if they start making Really Nice juggalo shirts. And for the exact same reasons. I'm actually not trying that hard. And i actually think the harsh criticism is fair game. This is a company that's gone out of their way to make outlandish and verifiably false claims. They overtly whore up their marketing to appeal to specific youth groups. When someone's going balls-out, I figure i have every right to call 'em on it.

I can definitely see where you're coming from here, although Skullycandy isn't the only company treading in moral gray areas. Definitely a valid concern, but that doesn't have much to say about how they sound, thats all.

jess

 

[kpeezy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ericj /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm actually not trying that hard. And i actually think the harsh criticism is fair game. This is a company that's gone out of their way to make outlandish and verifiably false claims. They overtly whore up their marketing to appeal to specific youth groups. When someone's going balls-out, I figure i have every right to call 'em on it.

Well, even if the claims are legit, if you actually want them to be voiced you might want to phrase them in a more polite manner. You could actually be heard if you try or so it would seem.