To be clear, my response was to these specific comments:
>>"I wouldn’t touch the Venoms, no matter how good they may sound. Their XLRs look pretty, but are substandard. As described in this post, the female is a poor design, similar to cheap cables offered by Monoprice and Hosa.<<"
Having had no hands on or anecdotal experience, these comments were based on a partial photo of a female connector. The comments were not qualified or measured, but stated as fact. I replied with facts. The connector is not a re-issue of another design. Metals are of the highest quality. The connectors are custom-manufactured, not copies of Hosa or Monoprice (no idea who those companies are). The connectors were stress-tested and passed every test we have to give a connector. No broken pins, connector ends or bent metals, either in our bench tests or in the field.
I've no idea why this would be "news", but just because a connector has a minor design element in common with another connector that failed, does not mean all will fail with a similar minor element in common. Even individual runs of industry standard, reliable connectors can fail. Material differences alone can make all the difference, i.e.: metal types, manufacturing processes and metals reinforcement. Even which factory builds the connectors, what corners are cut or not cut to save or spend a nickel per connector--It ALL matters and a photo tells you NONE of that. Even knowing half of these facts makes accepting comments like these hard to manage.
Isn't pointing to a partial photo of a single part on a female XLR connector to say, " the female is a poor design, similar to cheap cables" an unsupportable comment? No hands on needed? No knowledge of the specific design, the metals, the stress-tests involved, what was spent, or what the QC controls were? No homework, just a random comment based on looking at a photo of a single part of a female XLR. No responsibility to be fair or accurate. Just fire away. Great.
Regards,
Grant
Shunyata Research