[angel_teres]

this is at the six moons sights in the letters place pages on the way down.

An open letter to our readers:
Unsolicited and from different and completely independent sources, I've now been repeatedly informed that the SinglePower MPX3 I reviewed really is a push/pull rather than single-ended design as claimed; has no patent-pending as is claimed; and is based on a design originally published on HeadWize without acknowledging its origin or having obtained commercial licensing rights. Having first rejected these claims as attempts by a competitor to discredit SinglePower, the multiplicity of contacts that didn't know I had received prior and identical notes from others; the fact that these parties had opened up these SinglePower units to inspect them; and the fact that owners of SinglePower amps have been openly threatened to publish images of their possessions' insides on HeadFi.Org makes me suspicious that my review might have misrepresented both the single-ended Class A nature and the patent-pending claim of the SinglePower MPX-3. I can't be sure but readers are advised that any potential misrepresentation occured solely as a result of taking the manufacturer's claims at face value. This is completely independent from the extraordinary sonics I described which are very much factual. Any possible discrepancies otherwise are brought up here solely for the record and to indicate that the Class of operation and the patent claim could be other than described in my review. If indeed the case, I would have been openly and deliberately deceived by the manufacturer. I shall leave this question open as unanswered but have decided to forgo any future reviews of SinglePower products just in case. Also for the record, Mikhail Rotenberg of SinglePower has been informed of these allegations and assured me on the phone that they are incorrect.

Cheers,
Srajan Ebaen, publisher

 

[gsferrari]

I just read that. Again - he is just assuming things until and unless we know who these "sources" are and how they came to their conclusion.

This situation is NOT going to be resolved until :-

* Mikhail makes a statement that sets everything straight
* A third party impartial investigation tests the equipment and comes to a conclusion that can be repeated reliably

Until such time nothing more can be read into this situation.

 

[nanahachi]

nm, i broke my own rule. no more amp forum.

 

[bln]

What's pathetic?

 

[Len]

I get a feeling Srajan Ebaen is going to soon post another addendum to his recent edit. I am not clear why he feels comfortable rumor-mongering in a professional publication (things like "the fact that owners of SinglePower amps have been openly threatened" aren't substantiated as far as I know). I may be completely wrong about the facts of this whole messy affair, but it seems to me this addendum is irresponsible press and compounds the debacle.

 

[elrod-tom]

Folks,

Please consider this thread to be but another extension of the amp thread. Off-topic posts will be deleted, and the kind of heated exchanges that were commonplace in the last thread will not be permitted.

Let's keep this discussion relevant and civil. Thanks.

 

[Jahn]

Even though I love posting I think it's best for me to ban myself from this thread too. Reading this is giving me a bigger and bigger downer. I'm off to meet lan and romanee now to listen to some groovy modded Solo goodness!

 

[Mastergill]

It should be possible to see if there's really one (or several) patent-pending related to the Singlepower company.

There's not an administration web-site to check that?

 

[Dane]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bln What's pathetic?

One example could be if Head-Fi members really went on and contacted six moons based on speculation and rumers spread in this forum. This is however so far out, that I can't believe that - it must be other people in possesion of hard evidence regarding the patent-pending and the design.

 

[PhilS]

We live in a world where everyone wants to assume the worst about everyone and everything. It seems anyone can circulate rumor and innuendo nowadays that very quickly becomes accepted as fact. It is amazing a publication would make these statements without further investigation. Frankly, this undermines my confidence in 6moons. Even if everything is eventually straightened out, nobody ever reads the retraction on the bottom of page 5; they only remember the headlines.

 

[Tuberoller]

Why does'nt someone just contact Sixmoons and ask what info they have and where they got it from instead of assuming? That might help. The part about "muliplicity of contacts" and the statements in an earlier letter he posted seems to bear out some further proof he has seen.

 

[mjg]

the guy would not have posted this, as a professional journalist, if he didn't have credible sources or viable reasoning. Why not give him the benefit of the doubt before you dismiss what he is saying. He is simply trying to be frank and sincere about his words, rather then "factual" (and controversial).

I don'tt know for certain, but how on earth can you come to such a conclusion, based on what little you know? If the guy didn't feel dubious, he would say nothing. He is simply admitting there is a possibility he made a mistake in his ascertions. I didn't try to pick a fight or angst anyone into an atittude reaction, but i don't think this guy has any problems admitting something when he made a mistkae. I like mikhails amps and so does he, didn't you read he said that?

It's not as if he has rebuffed everything he meant about it, he is merely trying to not stipulate somethng he in fact cannot sya for certain. And he is also saying what the manafacturer always claims is not always the truth. With much respected intended to everyone, please don't misinterpret my post.

 

[vanillawafer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS We live in a world where everyone wants to assume the worst about everyone and everything. It seems anyone can circulate rumor and innuendo nowadays that very quickly becomes accepted as fact. It is amazing a publication would make these statements without further investigation. Frankly, this undermines my confidence in 6moons. Even if everything is eventually straightened out, nobody ever reads the retraction on the bottom of page 5; they only remember the headlines.

Well, they might have gone a little over board in their allegations, but they have to mention something or they could get in trouble. Also, we don't really know what they received as far as information that lead to their posting of this letter.

 

[Len]

I think it's right and reasonable for Sixmoons to mention something. However, it appears to me some "conclusions" can't yet substantiated and thus should not have been printed.

 

[mjg]

if anything, he gave himself wiggle room. He makes no conclusions. In fact he mentioned mikhails response. If anything he took a more neutral ground on this turf, and doesn't want to lose credibility of readers by ascerting something he can not say for certain.

I'm saying this, how would you like it if the news only said for instance, fox news, what rupert murdock thought you should know.

ouch, maybe they already do that : /

Still, my point stands. News and journalism shouldn't be friendly, the news, and nothing but the news. Isn't that some quote.