wrote in message
ups.com...
I think Clyde is terrified that if it were to happen to him, he would
be unable to discern the difference....

Taken from that point of view, his reaction is pretty obvious. But if
it is not fraud, it certainly treads on the knife's edge of fraud.


**Where did you acquire your legal training? And what do you understand by
the words: "Money back guarantee, if not completely satisfied."?


Now, 'fixed' is a strange word, and I haven't any idea what AUS$200
translates in off-the-shelf buying power these days, but speaking for
myself, I would have told the owner that he had a choice... a 'fix'
that would give him an operating pair of amps, or a restoration that
would have given him what I _expect_ he thinks he paid for, but at a
much higher price. If he did not ask you to explain the difference,
well and good. If he did, and you did in accordance with his direct
instructions, also well and good.

**If he asked what I had done, I would have explained in exquisite detail.
He was pleased to have his amps back and functioning and looking just like
they did when he gave them to me for service.


But, I will also state that if he discovers the deception (and that it
is) at _any_ point in the future, you are 100% obligated to provide him
with a repair up to his full and initial expectations, and at no
additional cost, not merely refund his money. By letting him get out of
your shop with those amps and withuout full-disclosure, that is exactly
where you are on the ethics scale.

**It gets a little more complex than that. After all, much of my work
involves straight service work. Some entails performance mods, where
appropriate. In many cases, due to the improvements gained through the use
of modern components and thinking, some repair work invloves an 'automatic'
upgrade. For instance: Replacing some capacitors and resistors in older
units, with identical parts, is impossible. It is now only reasonable to use
modern, high performance items. This will, inevitably, result in a
performance improvement. Where does one draw the line?


Keep one other mechanical item in mind. Tube amps clip pretty softly,
solid-state amps do not.

**That is a false and oft-repeated claim. SOME tube amps clip softly and
SOME SS amps do not. You forget that I had one good channel, with which I
was able to measure and duplicate the performance from.

What what happens if he changes the
application and drives your kluge to clipping? Just a thought.

**Question based on previous false assumption. Your question is, therefore,
invalid.

You
understand that you have given him an infinite warranty against even
his own potential for idiocy AND against any damage to other equipment
real or imagined that is touched by this amp.

**In which universe do you imagine that such a warranty has to be provided?
Look at the facts:

* The amp is now MUCH more reliable than it was.
* The amp will enjoy a much longer life than it previously could.
* The now has protection against owner stupidity, which it did not
previously have.


So, what happens if he pulls out a tube or three? Will the amp still
play? That *just* might get him to question what is actually going on.

**It may do so.


And, after all that, was it worth it?

**Lemme see:

* I have a happy client, who has since sent several other items to me for
service and has also recommended several other clients to me.

Yes, it was well worth it. For all concerned.

Normally, I don't need to perform such radical surgery on a tube (or any
other) amplifier. This was a unique situation. I addressed it accordingly.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...


* I have a happy client, who has since sent several other items to me for
service and has also recommended several other clients to me.


If he knew of your deceit,
he might not have recommended you to anyone else.

in article , Trevor Wilson at
wrote on 12/21/05 7:36 PM:


**If he asked what I had done, I would have explained in exquisite detail.
He was pleased to have his amps back and functioning and looking just like
they did when he gave them to me for service.

* * * Hmmm. A tube works because of an air vacuum. A serviced amp works
because of an ethical vacuum . . . ?

"If only he had asked" is beyond lame . . . . Gee, I would have told the
nice sheila that I slipped her a mickey before I shagged her brains out if
only she had asked!

Trevor, as a serviceman you have a duty of disclosure so that a client can
make an informed decision, even if that decision is ultimately not is his or
her best interest.


But, I will also state that if he discovers the deception (and that it
is) at _any_ point in the future, you are 100% obligated to provide him
with a repair up to his full and initial expectations, and at no
additional cost, not merely refund his money. By letting him get out of
your shop with those amps and withuout full-disclosure, that is exactly
where you are on the ethics scale.

**It gets a little more complex than that. After all, much of my work
involves straight service work. Some entails performance mods, where
appropriate. In many cases, due to the improvements gained through the use
of modern components and thinking, some repair work invloves an 'automatic'
upgrade. For instance: Replacing some capacitors and resistors in older
units, with identical parts, is impossible. It is now only reasonable to use
modern, high performance items. This will, inevitably, result in a
performance improvement. Where does one draw the line?

* * * How is an upgrade or mod anywhere on the same continuum as deception?
There ain't no line to draw between these two disparate points, IMHO.


Keep one other mechanical item in mind. Tube amps clip pretty softly,
solid-state amps do not.

**That is a false and oft-repeated claim. SOME tube amps clip softly and
SOME SS amps do not. You forget that I had one good channel, with which I
was able to measure and duplicate the performance from.

What what happens if he changes the
application and drives your kluge to clipping? Just a thought.

**Question based on previous false assumption. Your question is, therefore,
invalid.

* * * You can parse a logical argument but keep flexible on ethical
matters?

You
understand that you have given him an infinite warranty against even
his own potential for idiocy AND against any damage to other equipment
real or imagined that is touched by this amp.

**In which universe do you imagine that such a warranty has to be provided?
Look at the facts:

* The amp is now MUCH more reliable than it was.

* * * Ergo, the ends justify the means? Sometimes . . . But not here.

* The amp will enjoy a much longer life than it previously could.
* The now has protection against owner stupidity, which it did not
previously have.

* * * Guess the owner was too stupid to explain what you did.


So, what happens if he pulls out a tube or three? Will the amp still
play? That *just* might get him to question what is actually going on.

**It may do so.


And, after all that, was it worth it?

**Lemme see:

* I have a happy client, who has since sent several other items to me for
service and has also recommended several other clients to me.

Yes, it was well worth it. For all concerned.

Normally, I don't need to perform such radical surgery on a tube (or any
other) amplifier. This was a unique situation. I addressed it accordingly.


* * * *

Let's sift through the bull****.

Give me the contact information for your client. I'll ask him if he knew
what was done to his amp. Then I'll get back to the group and report how
happy he was with the info.

Jon

"Jon Yaeger" wrote in message
...
in article , Trevor Wilson at
wrote on 12/21/05 7:36 PM:


**If he asked what I had done, I would have explained in exquisite
detail.
He was pleased to have his amps back and functioning and looking just
like
they did when he gave them to me for service.

* * * Hmmm. A tube works because of an air vacuum. A serviced amp works
because of an ethical vacuum . . . ?

"If only he had asked" is beyond lame . . . . Gee, I would have told the
nice sheila that I slipped her a mickey before I shagged her brains out if
only she had asked!

Trevor, as a serviceman you have a duty of disclosure so that a client can
make an informed decision, even if that decision is ultimately not is his
or
her best interest.

**I offered my client two choices; AUS$800.00 or AUS$200.00. He chose. He
did not seem overly interested in the minute detail, as long as the sound
quality was up to the standards he required. That was easy to accomplish.



But, I will also state that if he discovers the deception (and that it
is) at _any_ point in the future, you are 100% obligated to provide him
with a repair up to his full and initial expectations, and at no
additional cost, not merely refund his money. By letting him get out of
your shop with those amps and withuout full-disclosure, that is exactly
where you are on the ethics scale.

**It gets a little more complex than that. After all, much of my work
involves straight service work. Some entails performance mods, where
appropriate. In many cases, due to the improvements gained through the
use
of modern components and thinking, some repair work invloves an
'automatic'
upgrade. For instance: Replacing some capacitors and resistors in older
units, with identical parts, is impossible. It is now only reasonable to
use
modern, high performance items. This will, inevitably, result in a
performance improvement. Where does one draw the line?

* * * How is an upgrade or mod anywhere on the same continuum as
deception?
There ain't no line to draw between these two disparate points, IMHO.

**Sure there is. Service people always substitute devices and components
during service work.



Keep one other mechanical item in mind. Tube amps clip pretty softly,
solid-state amps do not.

**That is a false and oft-repeated claim. SOME tube amps clip softly and
SOME SS amps do not. You forget that I had one good channel, with which I
was able to measure and duplicate the performance from.

What what happens if he changes the
application and drives your kluge to clipping? Just a thought.

**Question based on previous false assumption. Your question is,
therefore,
invalid.

* * * You can parse a logical argument but keep flexible on ethical
matters?

**YOU think what I did was unethical. My client is happy. And, just to
remind you: I provided a WRITTEN MONEY BACK GUARANTEE. I see no conflict. If
my client was unhappy, I would have removed the mods, restored the amp to
it's original condition, free of charge, or for $800.00 serviced the amp the
manner YOU feel is better. I stress YOU feel, because the client was
entirely happy with the result.


You
understand that you have given him an infinite warranty against even
his own potential for idiocy AND against any damage to other equipment
real or imagined that is touched by this amp.

**In which universe do you imagine that such a warranty has to be
provided?
Look at the facts:

* The amp is now MUCH more reliable than it was.

* * * Ergo, the ends justify the means? Sometimes . . . But not here.

* The amp will enjoy a much longer life than it previously could.
* The now has protection against owner stupidity, which it did not
previously have.

* * * Guess the owner was too stupid to explain what you did.

**The owner's talents lie elsewhere. He is far more talented in the law,
than I am. I would not call him stupid.



So, what happens if he pulls out a tube or three? Will the amp still
play? That *just* might get him to question what is actually going on.

**It may do so.


And, after all that, was it worth it?

**Lemme see:

* I have a happy client, who has since sent several other items to me for
service and has also recommended several other clients to me.

Yes, it was well worth it. For all concerned.

Normally, I don't need to perform such radical surgery on a tube (or any
other) amplifier. This was a unique situation. I addressed it
accordingly.


* * * *

Let's sift through the bull****.

Give me the contact information for your client.

**Short answer: No.


I'll ask him if he knew
what was done to his amp. Then I'll get back to the group and report how
happy he was with the info.

**It will never happen.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

in article , Trevor Wilson at
wrote on 12/22/05 4:57 AM:


**I offered my client two choices; AUS$800.00 or AUS$200.00. He chose. He
did not seem overly interested in the minute detail, as long as the sound
quality was up to the standards he required. That was easy to accomplish.

* * * Was one of those "minor details" the fact that he was getting back a
SS amp instead of a tube amp? That ain't no minor detail, bud, no matter
how you try to spin it. Shame you don't "get" it.

* * * Everyone in the USA knows the story of Bill Clinton's trying to parse
the meaning of "is," or denying that having oral sex was actually having
"sex." Why can't people admit that they screwed up and learn from it
instead of foolishly trying to justify an indefensible position?

**YOU think what I did was unethical. My client is happy. And, just to
remind you: I provided a WRITTEN MONEY BACK GUARANTEE. I see no conflict. If
my client was unhappy, I would have removed the mods, restored the amp to
it's original condition, free of charge, or for $800.00 serviced the amp the
manner YOU feel is better. I stress YOU feel, because the client was
entirely happy with the result.

* * * Truth trumps happiness, in my book. The written money-back guarantee
is a great thing if you had told the client what he was getting (and hence
what you were guaranteeing). Don't you see your designing the circuit with
roll-off filters (to simulate a ****ty OPT) and leaving the tubes, etc. was
pure deception IN THE ABSENCE OF DISCLOSURE AND CLIENT AGREEMENT?


Let's sift through the bull****.

Give me the contact information for your client.

**Short answer: No.


I'll ask him if he knew
what was done to his amp. Then I'll get back to the group and report how
happy he was with the info.

**It will never happen.

* * * Of course not. Sounds like your friend is a lawyer and he'd
probably sue you ass for fraud.

* * * At the end of the day, integrity is the measure of the man.

Jon

"Jon Yaeger" wrote in message

in article , Trevor Wilson
at wrote on 12/22/05
4:57 AM:


**I offered my client two choices; AUS$800.00 or
AUS$200.00. He chose. He did not seem overly interested
in the minute detail, as long as the sound quality was
up to the standards he required. That was easy to
accomplish.

* * * Was one of those "minor details" the fact that he
was getting back a SS amp instead of a tube amp?

Dooh!

That ain't no minor detail, bud, no matter how you try to spin
it.

Isn't beauty in the eye of the beholder?

Shame you don't "get" it.

I think that Trevor got *it* very well.

* * * Everyone in the USA knows the story of Bill
Clinton's trying to parse the meaning of "is," or denying
that having oral sex was actually having "sex." Why
can't people admit that they screwed up and learn from it
instead of foolishly trying to justify an indefensible
position?

Show me where Treveor screwed up?

**YOU think what I did was unethical. My client is
happy. And, just to remind you: I provided a WRITTEN
MONEY BACK GUARANTEE. I see no conflict. If my client
was unhappy, I would have removed the mods, restored the
amp to it's original condition, free of charge, or for
$800.00 serviced the amp the manner YOU feel is better.
I stress YOU feel, because the client was entirely happy
with the result.

* * * Truth trumps happiness, in my book. The written
money-back guarantee is a great thing if you had told the
client what he was getting (and hence what you were
guaranteeing). Don't you see your designing the circuit
with roll-off filters (to simulate a ****ty OPT) and
leaving the tubes, etc. was pure deception IN THE ABSENCE
OF DISCLOSURE AND CLIENT AGREEMENT?

Let's sift through the bull****.

Give me the contact information for your client.

**Short answer: No.

Right, it's nobody's business but Trevor's.

I'll ask him if he knew
what was done to his amp. Then I'll get back to the
group and report how happy he was with the info.

**It will never happen.

* * * Of course not. Sounds like your friend is a
lawyer and he'd probably sue you ass for fraud.

Oh my, such dire predictions.

* * * At the end of the day, integrity is the measure of
the man.

Integrity is well served by providing legitimate services for an honest
price.

All the tubies are upset because Trevor's anecdote shows that people do not
always discern what some audio partisans want them to discern.

This reminds me of Tom Nousaine's anecdote about substituting a Pioneer
receiver for a high end preamp and power amp in someone's system. Tom
didn't actually do the substitution, the owner's son did the deed. The owner
proudly showed off his high end electronics and obtained many favorable
comments about the sound quality.

Tom's anecdote is true - I was there at the time.

This anecdote also produced loud wails from the partisans of expensive
electronics.

The truth can hurt, but that doesn't make it a bad thing.

On Thu, 22 Dec 2005 09:35:16 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

All the tubies are upset because Trevor's anecdote shows that people do not
always discern what some audio partisans want them to discern.

This reminds me of Tom Nousaine's anecdote about substituting a Pioneer
receiver for a high end preamp and power amp in someone's system. Tom
didn't actually do the substitution, the owner's son did the deed. The owner
proudly showed off his high end electronics and obtained many favorable
comments about the sound quality.

Fortunately for the SS (pun intended) types, nobody has ever done the
deed on them. I have no doubt that the result would be the same.

dave weil said:

All the tubies

No, you may not inspect our "firehoses", Homoborg.

Fortunately for the SS (pun intended) types, nobody has ever done the
deed on them. I have no doubt that the result would be the same.

Maybe so, but it wouldn't "prove" anything because tube amps are always
more expensive than comparably powered SS ones.

Now, about that "debating trade" seminar......

"Jon Yaeger" wrote in message
...
in article , Trevor Wilson at
wrote on 12/22/05 4:57 AM:


**I offered my client two choices; AUS$800.00 or AUS$200.00. He chose. He
did not seem overly interested in the minute detail, as long as the sound
quality was up to the standards he required. That was easy to accomplish.

* * * Was one of those "minor details" the fact that he was getting back
a
SS amp instead of a tube amp? That ain't no minor detail, bud, no matter
how you try to spin it. Shame you don't "get" it.


**On the contrary, I DO get it. He wanted a pair of tube amps, which looked
like tube amps and sounded like tube amps, so he could proclaim that his 45
year old amps were still working. He got what he wanted. They look and sound
like the originals.


* * * Everyone in the USA knows the story of Bill Clinton's trying to
parse
the meaning of "is," or denying that having oral sex was actually having
"sex." Why can't people admit that they screwed up and learn from it
instead of foolishly trying to justify an indefensible position?

**YOU think what I did was unethical. My client is happy. And, just to
remind you: I provided a WRITTEN MONEY BACK GUARANTEE. I see no conflict.
If
my client was unhappy, I would have removed the mods, restored the amp to
it's original condition, free of charge, or for $800.00 serviced the amp
the
manner YOU feel is better. I stress YOU feel, because the client was
entirely happy with the result.

* * * Truth trumps happiness, in my book. The written money-back
guarantee
is a great thing if you had told the client what he was getting (and hence
what you were guaranteeing). Don't you see your designing the circuit with
roll-off filters (to simulate a ****ty OPT) and leaving the tubes, etc.
was
pure deception IN THE ABSENCE OF DISCLOSURE AND CLIENT AGREEMENT?

**Decpetion? Possibly. Fraud? No. The client got what he wanted.



Let's sift through the bull****.

Give me the contact information for your client.

**Short answer: No.


I'll ask him if he knew
what was done to his amp. Then I'll get back to the group and report
how
happy he was with the info.

**It will never happen.

* * * Of course not. Sounds like your friend is a lawyer and he'd
probably sue you ass for fraud.

**A judge, actually.


* * * At the end of the day, integrity is the measure of the man.

**In the real world, practicality is the norm. You'll learn that as you grow
up.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

in article , Trevor Wilson at
wrote on 12/22/05 3:45 PM:


**On the contrary, I DO get it. He wanted a pair of tube amps, which looked
like tube amps and sounded like tube amps, so he could proclaim that his 45
year old amps were still working. He got what he wanted. They look and sound
like the originals.

Bull****. He got smoke and mirrors.


* * * At the end of the day, integrity is the measure of the man.

**In the real world, practicality is the norm. You'll learn that as you grow
up.


Your definition of practicality is an ends-justifies-the-means ethic. The
problem is, I have grown up, and I don't approve of childish lies and overt
adult deception. If you develop a sense of ethics, you'll understand what I
mean. In the meantime, there is a gulf between us as wide as Lazarus and
the rich man.

Jon

Jon Yaeger said:

In the meantime, there is a gulf between us as wide as Lazarus and
the rich man.

Christ.

Jon Yaeger wrote :

If you develop a sense of ethics


IMHO you are confusing ethics and deontology.

Ethic : the principles of right and wrong that are accepted by an individual
or a social group

Deontology : the theory or study of moral obligation.

IMHO, in the first case your answer to Trevor is insulting and automatically
bans you from Usenet ethical references. ;-)


--
"Nobody seemes to have actaully read what i wrote.
But what's new around here?"

Dave Weil, Sun, 05 Oct 2003 00:57:15

Jon Yaeger wrote:

in article , Trevor Wilson at
wrote on 12/22/05 3:45 PM:


**On the contrary, I DO get it. He wanted a pair of tube amps, which looked
like tube amps and sounded like tube amps, so he could proclaim that his 45
year old amps were still working. He got what he wanted. They look and sound
like the originals.

Bull****. He got smoke and mirrors.

Isn't that actually what *all* tube amps are about ?

Graham

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

"Jon Yaeger" wrote in message
...
in article , Trevor Wilson at
wrote on 12/22/05 4:57 AM:


**I offered my client two choices; AUS$800.00 or AUS$200.00. He chose.
He
did not seem overly interested in the minute detail, as long as the
sound
quality was up to the standards he required. That was easy to
accomplish.

* * * Was one of those "minor details" the fact that he was getting back
a
SS amp instead of a tube amp? That ain't no minor detail, bud, no matter
how you try to spin it. Shame you don't "get" it.


**On the contrary, I DO get it. He wanted a pair of tube amps, which
looked like tube amps and sounded like tube amps, so he could proclaim
that his 45 year old amps were still working. He got what he wanted. They
look and sound like the originals.


well, he doesn't havea pair of tube amps anymore!

**It gets a little more complex than that. After all, much of my work
involves straight service work. Some entails performance mods, where
appropriate. In many cases, due to the improvements gained through the use
of modern components and thinking, some repair work invloves an 'automatic'
upgrade. For instance: Replacing some capacitors and resistors in older
units, with identical parts, is impossible. It is now only reasonable to use
modern, high performance items. This will, inevitably, result in a
performance improvement. Where does one draw the line?

Somewhere between upgrading essentially like-for-like parts and
complete conversion from tube to SS.

Hey, guy, I brought you in a diesel, and you gave me back a similarly
powerful gasoline engine. Since I am nearly deaf, I could not tell the
difference right away. But....

That you did not tell him and that you did not get his approval (even
appreciation) in advance is where the ethics break down. Remind me not
to take stuff to you for service. Your heart may be in the right place,
and maybe you even did a clever piece of work, but sheeesh.....

Normally, I don't need to perform such radical surgery on a tube (or any
other) amplifier. This was a unique situation. I addressed it accordingly.

What you did is the functional equivalent of those "Spirit of St.
Louis" crappo-repro radios. Faux tubes. Some appreciate that, and he
may well have. But, in fact, it was not your decision to make.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

wrote in message
ups.com...
**It gets a little more complex than that. After all, much of my work
involves straight service work. Some entails performance mods, where
appropriate. In many cases, due to the improvements gained through the use
of modern components and thinking, some repair work invloves an
'automatic'
upgrade. For instance: Replacing some capacitors and resistors in older
units, with identical parts, is impossible. It is now only reasonable to
use
modern, high performance items. This will, inevitably, result in a
performance improvement. Where does one draw the line?

Somewhere between upgrading essentially like-for-like parts and
complete conversion from tube to SS.

Hey, guy, I brought you in a diesel, and you gave me back a similarly
powerful gasoline engine. Since I am nearly deaf, I could not tell the
difference right away. But....

**BIG difference. You can't run a diesel engine on gasoline. For all intents
and purposes, the amplifiers were the same as they came in. Except they now
work. In any case, I provided a WRITTEN MONEY BACK GUARANTEE. Do you have a
concept of what that means?


That you did not tell him and that you did not get his approval (even
appreciation) in advance is where the ethics break down. Remind me not
to take stuff to you for service. Your heart may be in the right place,
and maybe you even did a clever piece of work, but sheeesh.....

**I provided my client with two choices - AUS$800.00 or AUS$200.00. He
chose.


Normally, I don't need to perform such radical surgery on a tube (or any
other) amplifier. This was a unique situation. I addressed it accordingly.

What you did is the functional equivalent of those "Spirit of St.
Louis" crappo-repro radios. Faux tubes. Some appreciate that, and he
may well have. But, in fact, it was not your decision to make.

**Not even close. The amplifiers are essentially untouched. All the original
parts are still in place (including the faulty output transformers). All the
old 1960s components. I just added a few, more modern bits, disconnected the
HT supply and provided a reliable, working pair of amplifiers, with a
WRITTEN MONEY BACK GUARANTEE. I just thought I'd emphasise that one more
time. If the client wants to resurrect them back to their original condition
(well, as close as possible, anyway, given that they've already seem several
previous service jobs from other companies, over the years), then all the
parts are there. It would be a relatively simple (if not expensive) job to
do so.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

What is it with Ozzies? Trevor is spinning like a top on a pretty
obvious ethics issue, Phil fulminates in ignorance from his dung-heep,
and Patrick the superficially sanest of the bunch is congenitally
unable to leave well-enough alone.

Must be something in the water.... I am not sufficiently biblical to
attribute it to ancestry.


Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

.....

**BIG difference. You can't run a diesel engine on gasoline. For all
intents and purposes, the amplifiers were the same as they came in. Except
they now work. In any case, I provided a WRITTEN MONEY BACK GUARANTEE. Do
you have a concept of what that means?


Yes, it means you fooled him, but
will give him his money back when and if he discovers your deceit.