Talk:Grado Labs
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] NPOV
NPOV does not mean unbiased, but that the article takes a neutral point of view. The oppinion of "phono cartridges" is attributed to audiophiles, so I think it's NPOV. Maybe I'm wrong on this? Reub2000 21:49, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
I think that you have a point...however, who but audiophiles are really qualified to make that distinction? Certainly it would be less biased if they got an average joe to test the cartridges, but audiophiles are the ones who will notice and care about the differences. Tapanageta 11:52, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
- I also think that someone who has a high regard of audiology and psychoacoustics should also test out Grado's headphones as well, as Grado's Headphones often uses the Supra-Aural Form Factor. I really think Grado needs to start making Circumaural Headphones IMO. — Mark Kim (Reply/Start Talk) 23:38, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
I believe the GS-1000 are circumaural - User
[edit] Escalated article to Condition 2
After going over the article over and over again, I feel that the article's lack of neutrality is the problem, and at my discretion, I have thus decided that this article needs to be fixed a bit in order to be a bit more neutral, as it's too much goes in detail regarding about Grado's headphones. Some audiophile who has high praise with these headphones started out this article—apparently it's coming to a point where it's lacking too much neutrality, so I'm gonna have to state it as not being neutral completely. — Mark Kim (Reply/Start Talk) 15:35, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
I disagree. How is a simple layout of the product history of any brand anything but "absolute and non-negotiable." Now there might be other parts of the article that might not be neutral, but the general content, I feel, is not.Wsender 23:38, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
I strongly disagree, with one caveat. Most of the article is expository in nature, and is quite accurate. It takes no position, and therefore cannot be contested. The exception to this is the "Criticisms" section. This is perhaps non-neutral, but more importantly is just plain goofy and generally wrong. Point in case: "While Grado's round-cup, open-air, and supra-aural policy worked really well through the years, noise-cancelling veterans are dying for a noise-cancellation version of Grado's headphones plus headphone aficionados are expecting more out of Grado in the future." At the present time, all high-end headphones are open, and the thought of noise canceling Grado’s is simply laughable. “Criticisms” section needs to be re-written, but there is nothing else wrong with the article. — User
- I feel that for some reason, the article has been written by some audiophile who had too much praise with Grado's headphones. I really am worried about this as this article just seems to be pro-Grado rather than a neutral article. That is why I have issues with this article, since it currently overly praises the Grado headphones as a whole. — Mark Kim (Reply/Start Talk) 20:01, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
- In my opinion the article is now fairly good as far as NPOV goes except where it says "which year after year won many awards and accolades from many audio publishing groups and the like, namely Stereophile magazine.". It would be better if someone mentioned actual awards they've won rather than just claiming they they win awards year after year. Thats my main criticism as of right now --Hugzz 09:28, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Tables
I've already deployed the tables for all domestically-made Grado headphones. I'm gonna hold up on the fancier Grado Headphones (Grado novelties) until I can see what I can do about the notes, since notes can be a big pest to work with. — Mark Kim (Reply/Start Talk) 00:55, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Also, the Sennheiser versus Grado paragraph should be removed. It's obviously a biased opinion, and the nature of the sound signature shouldn't be presented as Fact.
The GS1000 is not a sucessor to the HP1000.
[edit] Requested move
The suggested move makes perfect sense. —User
- Agreed, but I need more users to agree with the move to Grado Labs before it commences. — The Evil in Everyone (U * T/R * CTD) 16:33, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
I also agree that the name should be moved --FLECOM
I totally agree, that's the name of the company--Dougmwpsu
OK, it will be done ASAP. Enough votes to do so. — Vesther (U * T/R * CTD) 19:14, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Move complete
I moved the article and hopefully, I wikilink-fixed all possible "things" at the article's "What Links Here" link. If there are any more bugs, please direct any attention-grabbing bugs directly to me. Thanx. — Vesther (U * T/R * CTD) 19:27, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
