My experience with Lampizator

[Argonaut]

Lampizator Homepage > Returns Policy > http://www.lampizatorna.com/returns-policy/

Presumably you purchased your Speakers and Turntable without bothering to acquaint yourself with the official and published Magico or Kronos return policies either!

 

[FrantzM]

Why did this have to be dealt in an open forum? I am sure that this could have been treated privately with much better outcome.

 

[Geardaddy]

there is conflicting information here. Once the 101Ds were received, how long did you have the dac? Very few companies are so generous with eval periods like this....

 

[Geardaddy]

Why did this have to be dealt in an open forum? I am sure that this could have been treated privately with much better outcome.

+1

 

[Argonaut]

Why did this have to be dealt in an open forum? I am sure that this could have been treated privately with much better outcome.

Tribunal by open forum !

 

[joeinid]

Why did this have to be dealt in an open forum? I am sure that this could have been treated privately with much better outcome.

+1

+2

 

[Hi-FiGuy]

+1000

Box it up and sell it on Audiogon, learn and move on, life is too short.

This is not the place.

On your next purchase leave no stone unturned as far as expectations and policies.

 

[blbloom]

Why did this have to be dealt in an open forum? I am sure that this could have been treated privately with much better outcome.

It was made public from day one.

"Well my Lampi arrived today (instead of Monday) - yay!

Unfortunately...
1. It's too deep to fit in my rack
2. It's too high (with tubes) to fit in my rack
3. It has a loose screw rolling around inside it
4. I didn't get a manual and there's a toggle switch in the back that isn't labelled
5. I can't get it to turn on.

Sigh…"

 

[caliaripaolo]

Why did this have to be dealt in an open forum? I am sure that this could have been treated privately with much better outcome.

because all people here are interested to know how companies are reliable or not.
Because a distributor has not stock or demo items, but is a simple box moving. Because for a day or a couple of days a return request is refused, even if item had issues.
Not to mention the quality control of certain companies, since not even they control what is included in the packing list.

 

[ack]

We are not unwilling to honor our policy. Mr. Currie asked for something he was not entitled to, even under the most liberal of interpretations.

If you are open to friendly advice, you are not going to make a successful business with that kind of response. Special circumstances virtually always require bending the rules. Yes, technically, Ian is past his grace period any which way he looks at it. The question is: what's the business cost to you now.

 

[Al M.]

Fred,

frankly, I am appalled that you would use a forum post of mine as 'proof' that Ian wanted to keep the unit:

"Ian and I wholeheartedly agreed that the Lampi was the superior DAC among the ones heard in his system, and it's a winner."

Yes, I said among the three DACs that I heard in his system the Lampizator was a winner, and Ian may have agreed with me, but I never intended that this suggested he was ready to keep the DAC. In fact, while we drank coffee shortly after that exchange of impressions I mentioned, like I had several times before, that he should try the Berkeley Reference DAC before he made a decision (honestly, I had thought the Lampi was a non-binding free try-out, and had no clue that Ian already had deposited money). I personally would never buy a Lampi without having heard the Berkeley Reference DAC as well, but that is just me -- since I exclusively listen to Redbook CD, I am a PCM-only guy, so naturally I would look for a PCM source first (I have no interest in DSD, frankly, simply because the available music is so little compared to PCM). Certainly, I was impressed by the DSD-converted PCM signal on the Lampi, but it would not have been my natural choice. So yes, among the 3 DACs auditioned the Lampi may have been the winner, but this was by no means meant in absolute terms. Re-read my statement again, please. And perhaps I should have left out the term "wholeheartedly", which is questionable, but that was just my usual enthusiasm speaking.

So all in all, it is entirely unfair that you would use my post as 'proof' that Ian wanted to keep the unit. You didn't even know about the personal background of my comment, and I just helped you with that. You should have asked Ian himself if he wanted to keep the unit, and not refer to a forum post of mine.

While I have my doubts that it was the best way for Ian to go public with his complaints before trying to sort out things some more with you privately, I would strongly suggest that you come to a gentlemen's agreement with him about the return of the unit. Intransigence on this matter will in no way help the reputation of Lampizator, as also evident from some posts here and at Audioshark -- even though you have garnered some support for your position as well, but that is only a partial gain that I think will not yield a net bonus for you and the company you represent. Perhaps Ian is partially to blame for the situation, but you clearly are as well, and refusal to work towards a resolution of the matter will not work in favor of either you or Lampizator.

Al

 

[Al M.]

If you are open to friendly advice, you are not going to make a successful business with that kind of response. Special circumstances virtually always require bending the rules. Yes, technically, Ian is past his grace period any which way he looks at it. The question is: what's the business cost to you now.

Precisely.

 

[blbloom]

If you are open to friendly advice, you are not going to make a successful business with that kind of response. Special circumstances virtually always require bending the rules. Yes, technically, Ian is past his grace period any which way he looks at it. The question is: what's the business cost to you now.

So….Is it "By any means necessary". It's ok to harm someone's business in order to get what you want, even if you are not holding up your end of the agreement. He wasn't "technically" past the grace period. He was past the grace period, and looking for more time. I think you are giving advice to the wrong person.

And….What are the special circumstances? That he had to change a fuse and flip a switch? Because, that's all it turned out to be, if you read it carefully.

 

[Al M.]

And by the way, a 7-day returns policy is an awfully short time window, especially with a tubed unit that was not even broken in. If that's what a manufacturer offered me, I would refuse a purchase.

 

[ack]

So….Is it "By any means necessary". It's ok to harm someone's business in order to get what you want, even if you are not holding up your end of the agreement. He wasn't "technically" past the grace period. He was past the grace period, and looking for more time. I think you are giving advice to the wrong person.

And….What are the special circumstances? That he had to change a fuse and flip a switch? Because, that's all it turned out to be, if you read it carefully.

Yes I read everything carefully; I am only addressing the distributor's response with some advice. Feel free to respond to the original post as unethical or however else you feel, but my response was very narrow and to a specific individual.

PS: The "special circumstances" is the blown up tube within literally a week to 10 days, following a couple of other minor mishaps which just didn't start the whole process on the right foot. Here's bonzo's response on this, with which I agree:

Also, I don't understand - if your 101d blew up today, there is still a technical fault, even if it's past 1 or 2 days beyond the trial period? Isn't that a reason to take back a product?

 

[Geardaddy]

Fred,

frankly, I am appalled that you would use a forum post of mine as 'proof' that Ian wanted to keep the unit:

"Ian and I wholeheartedly agreed that the Lampi was the superior DAC among the ones heard in his system, and it's a winner."

Yes, I said among the three DACs that I heard in his system the Lampizator was a winner, and Ian may have agreed with me, but I never intended that this suggested he was ready to keep the DAC. In fact, while we drank coffee shortly after that exchange of impressions I mentioned, like I had several times before, that he should try the Berkeley Reference DAC before he made a decision (honestly, I had thought the Lampi was a non-binding free try-out, and had no clue that Ian already had deposited money). I personally would never buy a Lampi without having heard the Berkeley Reference DAC as well, but that is just me -- since I exclusively listen to Redbook CD, I am a PCM-only guy, so naturally I would look for a PCM source first (I have no interest in DSD, frankly, simply because the available music is so little compared to PCM). Certainly, I was impressed by the DSD-converted PCM signal on the Lampi, but it would not have been my natural choice. So yes, among the 3 DACs auditioned the Lampi may have been the winner, but this was by no means meant in absolute terms. Re-read my statement again, please. And perhaps I should have left out the term "wholeheartedly", which is questionable, but that was just my usual enthusiasm speaking.

So all in all, it is entirely unfair that you would use my post as 'proof' that Ian wanted to keep the unit. You didn't even know about the personal background of my comment, and I just helped you with that. You should have asked Ian himself if he wanted to keep the unit, and not refer to a forum post of mine.

While I have my doubts that it was the best way for Ian to go public with his complaints before trying to sort out things some more with you privately, I would strongly suggest that you come to a gentlemen's agreement with him about the return of the unit. Intransigence on this matter will in no way help the reputation of Lampizator, as also evident from some posts here and at Audioshark -- even though you have garnered some support for your position as well, but that is only a partial gain that I think will not yield a net bonus for you and the company you represent. Perhaps Ian is partially to blame for the situation, but you clearly are as well, and refusal to work towards a resolution of the matter will not work in favor of either you or Lampizator.

Al

Did you share your feelings with Fred in private first or did you post out of a sense of desperation?

I am in an industry where reputations can be torched by petulant and cowardly little trolls online. I loathe it. Guilty until proven innocent in cyberspace.

Very few manufactures, especially tubed ones, offer return policies. What is the return policy of Berkley?

I had an issue with my B7 due to shipping damage, and Fred and Lucasz took care of me and went above and beyond the call of duty.

Ian, I would trade the unit in for a GG if possible. It is an endgame dac IMO....

 

[Al M.]

Did you share your feelings with Fred in private first or did you post out of a sense of desperation?

I only heard that Ian had the return problems and went public after the fact.

No, I did not post out of a sense of desperation. I posted out of a need to clarify in public on an issue that was already public at the time, and to point out that my post was used by Fred in an unfair manner. He should have asked Ian directly if he liked the Lampi, and not deduced from my post that he wanted to keep it. That Fred implied what he did was a mistake -- he should have made sure with direct contact that the customer is satisfied, and not doing so was a grave omission that he cannot brush over with intransigence on the matter.

 

[blbloom]

Yes I read everything carefully; I am only addressing the distributor's response with some advice. Feel free to respond to the original post as unethical or however else you feel, but my response was very narrow and to a specific individual.

PS: The "special circumstances" is the blown up tube within literally a week to 10 days, following a couple of other minor mishaps which just didn't start the whole process on the right foot. Here's bonzo's response on this, with which I agree:

This is exactly what I am disturbed by. What blown up tube? There was no blown up tube. The tubes did not work correctly the day the DAC arrived because they were upgraded tubes that required the flip of a switch. That is normal on all the B7 Lampis. Nothing more. Fred told Ian that he could keep the upgraded tubes and he would send the other tubes, also. This was not a issue that would keep anyone from deciding on the DAC during the trial period, unless that was not the intention. Many of you read the first emails where the OP had not flipped the switch and decided there was a problem and Ian is not correcting anyone. It is unbelievable how the facts have been so easily distorted.

 

[blbloom]

I only heard that Ian had the return problems and went public after the fact.

No, I did not post out of a sense of desperation. I posted out of a need to clarify in public on an issue that was already public at the time, and to point out that my post was used by Fred in an unfair manner. He should have asked Ian directly if he liked the Lampi, and not deduced from my post that he wanted to keep it. That Fred implied what he did was a mistake -- he should have made sure with direct contact that the customer is satisfied, and not doing so was a grave omission that he cannot brush over with intransigence on the matter.

Wow…..All of a sudden privacy is an issue. Righteous indignation.

 

[Al M.]

Wow…..All of a sudden privacy is an issue. Righteous indignation.