Like Kelly (watch out, Kelly, we're agreeing again
), I'm usually on the side of the consumer. But I disagree with your position here, jpelg.
Quote:
Originally posted by jpelg
It is their defensive stance that has continued this discussion. |
How is going onto a public forum, in response to an accusatory customer, and clearly explaining the design decisions made on a product, a "defensive stance?" Your approach to this issue was very accusatory and very public. They responded quite reasonably to you, IMO.
Again agreeing with Kelly
, if you really had a problem paying for return shipping, you probably would have had better results just giving Todd a call and talking to him about your displeasure. And you might have also suggested that putting a note on the web site about this "issue" with volume pot noise might be a good idea for HeadRoom to do.
Anyways, just a few comments below. I'm not trying to "flame" you or anything like that -- I'm just discussing some of the statements you made in this thread.
Quote:
The main point is that HR makes the consumer pay for return shipping on even defective products returned for refunds or replacement. [snip] Defects are not the consumers fault and therefore the consumer should not be bearing the costs of restitution. |
But the product in question is not "defective" -- according to HeadRoom, they made a design decision that offers better sound, but comes with a bit of feedback during volume changes. If that's true, the behavior you're describing is not a defect, however much you don't like it. I think that's the point of contention here, is it not? While
you may not like the behavior exhibited during volume changes, and that's entirely your right, it is technically not a defect.
Quote:
It is here where we will probably continue to "agree to disagree". [snip] But when new designs introduce new issues that are apparently known by HR, but not explained, an potential customer reasonably assumes that the new version is at least as good as the old one. The whole "pot" issue leads me to believe that this is not true, at least in part. Unfortunately for me, you have power over my credit card at this point. |
I really don't understand your position here. Tyll has explained quite clearly why your AirHead exhibits this behavior. Yet you still seem to be accusing him/HeadRoom of trying to mislead you.
I think it's safe to say that the new AirHeads ARE as good as, and better than, the old ones -- but in order to make them better at a similar price point, HeadRoom had to "out-design" the older models. According to Tyll, they did so, but with the minor drawback explained.
Quote:
I did think, however, that there was some consensus that extraneous sound was "bad". Here again, I guess we must just "agree to disagree". |
Do you change the volume on a continual basis? If your AirHead was exhibiting noise during listening then I would say you have a rock-solid case. But if it only exhibits this behavior during volume changes, and this was a tradeoff to get better "listening" sound, it's hard to call it a major problem.
Let me put it to you this way. Which of the following products would you buy if they were all the same price?
1) A product that sounds pretty good, and is silent during volume changes.
2) A product that sounds
better than #1, but exhibits a bit of noise during volume changes.
3) A product that sounds
better than #1, and is silent during volume changes.
I think we'd all choose #3;
however, according to Tyll, that product doesn't exist because you just can't make it. So, you're left with either #1 or #2. If Tyll is being honest (which, based on his history here at Head-Fi, he usually is, sometimes brutally so), HeadRoom had to choose to make #1 or #2. Given that people who will be buying a headphone amp are people who want the best possible sound, it seems like a no-brainer that they chose #2.
Quote:
I guess I just "took one for the team", and these posts will serve to inform future potential customers of ALL relevant issues. |
To be clear, this is an issue between you and HeadRoom; you aren't representing anyone else in this situation. I, generally a consumer advocate, would gladly put up with a tiny amount of noise, only present during volume changes, if it means that the sound when I'm actually
listening is better.
Quote:
Trust me Tyll, I am totally "chill"(sorry, rhyme not intended |
I'm pretty sure Tyll is pronounced "tile"