advertisement


Russ Andrews fined by the Advertising Standards Authority

SmileyFace.jpg
 
It's about time. I would imagine the fine to be modest, they usually are as an opener. The way these things work are that you have the test case which establishes the rights and wrongs, then you are told to desist and given a slap on the legs. Only if you ignore it do they get the cane out for a proper spanking.

This is my experience in food, anyway. I've had the odd brush with the regulatory authorities when I briefly worked for a company that turned out to be more than a bit bent. We knew we were bending the rules on added water a bit too far (added water on frozen material is a favourite, indeed it's essential at a low level but it is rather easy to turn up the glaze level) and when Tradind Stds did a check and came up with an irregularity we pleaded "not us guv, bought in product, our supplier must have slipped in an odd 'un" at which point Trading Stds said something along the lines of "yeah, right, we believe you, but your cards are marked. We find this again and you'll be getting asked if you prefer football or snooker, know what I mean?":eek:
 
Well, ain't this the pyrrhic victory...

What's been achieved here? Russ and the audio industry gets its knuckles rapped, redesigns its advertising to point at the shiny shiny instead of the sciency sciency, and any investigation into mains pollution stops dead in its tracks in the UK. This has happened just at the time when the greatest potential mains polluter - the PC - gets to snuggle up to the hi-fi system.


I know there's more to this RF thing than meets the eye - how come my system sucks whenever I have the laptop plugged into the same power distribution block as the rest of my system, even when I'm not using the laptop as a source component? How come it doesn't suck when it's run off a different distribution block? Am I suddenly supposed to ignore this because it flies in the face of the ASA ruling?
 
Pyrrhic victory my eye. He can't justify his claims, therefore it's snake oil. Of course it isn't going to stop "investigation into mains pollution", it will just mean it gets done properly and not by someone who just wants to sell something that may or may not work but is certainly shiny.

If you really want to stop mains pollution then there are various circuits that do it. None of these cost £330 a metre, the last one I built cost about 30p.
 
Pyrrhic victory my eye. He can't justify his claims, therefore it's snake oil. Of course it isn't going to stop "investigation into mains pollution", it will just mean it gets done properly and not by someone who just wants to sell something that may or may not work but is certainly shiny.

If you really want to stop mains pollution then there are various circuits that do it. None of these cost £330 a metre, the last one I built cost about 30p.

You make claims that these circuits 'do it'... what legitimacy do you have in making those claims, that would pass the ASA's ruling?
 
These are from Kimber, of course. There's a range of them, some almost a reasonable price. The most expensive is the Signature at £335 for 1m. The longest offered is 2m, which is £464. How do you spend over £1,000? Custom lengths? I see the Classic (£128 for 2m) still claims to reject RFI. I wonder how long Russ Andrews has to remove these claims.

Not sure where you are getting your prices from, but the link in the article points here:
http://www.russandrews.com/product....&customer_id=PAA1237014111701KYWGGSXPYLGKRJPJ
Starting at £1,250.00. :eek:

Sam
 
Why knock it - he offers a returns policy so if you buy it and like what it does then great. If it doesn't work for you then apart from paying a bit of postage it's no loss.

Each to their own etc...

James
 
You make claims that these circuits 'do it'... what legitimacy do you have in making those claims, that would pass the ASA's ruling?
The circuits I built are conventional filter circuits, I think it's called a Delta filter. I also fitted suppressors to the fridge. It's very simple and conventional science to demonstrate that they work, all you need is an oscilloscope, and it's been written up in any number of scientific papers and established as science fact. That's how engineering works.:)
 
Why knock it - he offers a returns policy so if you buy it and like what it does then great. If it doesn't work for you then apart from paying a bit of postage it's no loss.

Each to their own etc...

James

I have no problem with him trying to sell whatever he wants, its just making claims in adverts that you cant backup or prove that is a problem...

Sam
 
I'm surprised at the findings, as my Reference R.A. mains leads make RFI muuuuuuuuch more musical.

The only way to keep your audio installation away from nasty domestic pollution is to have (a) dedicated radial circuit(s). So inexpensive in the scheme of things and so effective. Owner occupiers only,with full access to their incoming mains, unfortunately.

Filters strangle and adequate regeneration is expensive.
 
Golden rule for cable manufacturers:

Do your research, develop your products, be satisfied with the result and let your punters try before they buy. If they are happy let them make the claims of audibility in the purely subjective domain for you.

DO NOT make claims of audibilty yourself beyond posting up testimonials of genuine happy punters.

Simples.

This is how I would approach things,

"We have been looking into ways of reducing RFI on incoming mains. We've launched a new product called Sooper Dooper Elephant Trunk TM.

Try it for yourself. If it doesn't make your music sound better to you just send it back for a full refund within 30 days."
 
The circuits I built are conventional filter circuits, I think it's called a Delta filter. I also fitted suppressors to the fridge. It's very simple and conventional science to demonstrate that they work, all you need is an oscilloscope, and it's been written up in any number of scientific papers and established as science fact. That's how engineering works.:)

Sorry, but if you built and marketed said filters now, you would have to be incredibly careful of what claims you make. Engineering and good science got caught up as collateral damage in this ruling.
 


advertisement


Back
Top