2. misc-audio
  3. 1397585055

Where to Buy Audiophile Recordings with a Smile

I recently started using a major internet audio supplier for my lp's, sacd's and cd recordings. They usually come up number 1 in searches for lps (not Amazon). I probably spent close to $1,000 in the last 4 months with this company. Unfortunately I received an album that I didn't open after buying and when I finally did 4 months later the record was sonically a mess. I emailed customer service, explained my situation and asked if anything could be done. Since I found the problem after the 1 month return policy they said "no". I explained that I buy lots of recordings, also from some other sources but with my business schedule I don't always get to the new recordings in a timely manner and would they be willing to make an exception this time since I had listened to the majority of what they had sent me with no concerns. A second email indicated "no" so this company to save $20 and uphold their return policy has lost a customer.

Any suggestions on whom you've used over the years and that you have developed a good relationship with in all facets of being the buyer?
128x128jcbach
swampwalker's avatar
swampwalker
5,138 posts
 
Yogi/Czarivey- If you're willing to be dishonest in a transaction with a retailer how is one to be assured that you would not do same w a consumer. Dishonest is dishonest. Situational ethics is a slippery slope!
yogiboy's avatar
yogiboy
5,613 posts
 
Hey Swampwalker, The OP stated that the record was new and he spent over $1000.00 with the company. What is dishonest returning something defective? I presume you would not return anything?
swampwalker's avatar
swampwalker
5,138 posts
 
Yogiboy- If I waited until after the stated return period and was denied an exception, I would not order a new one just to be able to return the old one. That, IMO, is dishonest.
onhwy61's avatar
onhwy61
5,186 posts
 
Some people just don't think the rules apply to them and have no problem shifting the cost of their own actions onto others.

The OP did not practice due diligence and listen to the disc in a timely fashion, yet he wants to shift the cost of his mistake back onto the seller. The seller can then fold this cost into all future transactions with other buyers. It must be wonderful to not have to pay for your mistakes and not feel the slightest bit of guilt about it.

This post is not directed at the OP, but at those who encourage the OP to engage in dishonest behavior.
czarivey
5,916 posts
 
Learn to view the bright side:
When defective merchandise returns to manufacturer, one likely will take actions to correct malfunction on future units. Isn't that great and honest to other people?
Manufacturer at the same time benefits for better quality control in one's facility and possibly increases one's profits.
So who will suffer after all and what's indeed wrong or dishonest if no one actually will?
So what's indeed wrong or dishonest if everybody only benefit?
More to discover