Re: [Harp-L] Suzuki Firebreath

[Winslow Yerxa <winslowyerxa@xxxxxxxxx>]

To reply briefly:

Yes it's a public forum and everyone has the right to say what they
want.

But I don't see people trumpeting to the world that - gasp! - a reed
failed! - every time it happens. It's not earth shattering news.

But let's say it *is* earth shattering news. That means that it's so
unusual that it may not be typical of the product and warrants the
manufacturer's attention.

Sure, you can say what you want when you want. But if this is such an
unusual occurrence, then the fair thing to do is talk to the
manufacturer first, then report both that and the result of the
exchange to the list.

WInslow

--- Jonathan Ross <jross38@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Winslow wrote:
> 
> "Yes, individual reeds can be replaced. Contact Os Leguizamo at
> Suzuki
> for details - see my harp-l previous post for contact details (I see
> this thread is being cross-posted to harptalk as well)."
> 
> I doubt it's very easy for the individual, though.  There has been  
> discussion of this with other Suzukis, but maybe they have changed  
> the way the reeds are welded in this case.  I've always felt that  
> welded reeds make sense for the manufacturer, and probably are fine  
> for most people, but if you don't want to replace reed-plates  
> entirely for a single reed, maybe not the best for high-end stuff.   
> Still, for the overwhelming majority of buyers, it's not an issue-- 
> and maybe it has been changes to make replacement easier.
> 
> "I feel that this matter should have been addressed AFTER CONTACTING
> THE
> MANUFACTURER FOR INFORMATION instead of being trumpeted publically
> with
> no apparent contact to the manufacturer. Hardly fair to them, now, is
> it? "
> 
> ?  So, now we are obliged to contact the manufacturer or any product 
> 
> before reporting or reviewing it after usage?  Richard wrote in his  
> initial review that he would keep the list informed as time went on. 
>  
> He mentioned reed longevity then.  This is a follow up to that  
> initial post.  Moreover, for many reed longevity is a major point in 
> 
> what harmonica one buys.  Obviously, a sample of one is not  
> representative, but that's not the point.  Richard gave an initially 
> 
> good review and then a follow up when a problem developed.  To object
>  
> only to the negative experience and not the positive is a wonderful  
> example of hypocrisy.
> 
> As for fair--it's perfectly fair to publicize or criticize a product 
> 
> after purchase.  Suzuki sells these, therefore any buyer has the  
> absolute right to comment about the product.  Now, if it is a defect 
> 
> in the particular item not found in most or if there is a factual  
> error, then Suzuki has every right to point these out and even cry  
> foul in the later instance.  But, if everything is above board then  
> what Richard did is not only fair but should be applauded--he  
> reviewed something, said he'd follow up and he has.  A rare  
> occurrence on-line.
> 
> This is a discussion group.  A forum.  It is here to discuss the  
> harmonica in many forms.  If everything is handled behind closed  
> doors and hushed up for politeness or just to keep people's feelings 
> 
> from being hurt, it would loose all value pretty quickly.  In terms  
> of items for sale, if only the glowingly positive is posted and when 
> 
> a negative does come up it's actively suppressed, then it's more than
>  
> useless: it's misleading.
> 
> "My experience with Suzuki is that they are extremely conscientious
> and helpful to the user community."
> 
> I'm sure they are.  That said, this has absolutely nothing to do with
>  
> what Richard wrote except that it gives him an option for getting his
>  
> harmonica repaired.  Suzuki is one of my favorite companies at the  
> moment, as they are doing some truly innovative stuff and keep trying
>  
> new things.  But when you manufacture a product, you have to expect  
> reviews.  You hope they are as good as Richard's initial post was,  
> and hope that follow-ups and progress reports continue in that way.  
> 
> What's not fair is to cry foul if they don't (noting that Suzuki  
> hasn't done that--Winslow did).  Automobile magazines often do long  
> term tests.  If something goes wrong, they take it to get fixed, but 
> 
> they also report on it.  Sometimes they report before getting it  
> fixed, sometimes after.  Either way is above board--what's not above 
> 
> board on their part would be not mentioning problems.  If the  
> manufacturer wishes to respond to a claim, they can, but that doesn't
>  
> mean the claim shouldn't have been made or the perceived problem  
> reported--far from it.
> 
> Richard shouldn't be held to the same standard (he's doing this  
> reporting out of the goodness of his heart), but he has been meeting 
> 
> that standard quite well in this instance.
> 
> Thank you Richard for your initial (very positive) review and your  
> follow ups.  While a sample of one isn't representative, it's a  
> beginning of the process of getting information out there about the  
> new Suzuki--over time whether this is an abberation(sp) or a pattern 
> 
> will emerge from the many similar postings.  That's one of the  
> benefits of being a discussion group, IMO--a multiple perspective,  
> long-term view can emerge.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   ()()    JR "Bulldogge" Ross
> ()  ()   & Snuffy, too:)
> `----'
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Harp-L is sponsored by SPAH, http://www.spah.org
> Harp-L@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://harp-l.org/mailman/listinfo/harp-l
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com