15-Sep-2015, 20:33
The
It seems my reply was not as clear as I hoped it would be
I understand that there is no relation between the dangerous remote behaviour and the Spark update to the volume at source change. I appreciate that the current remote is an inept implementation of the proposed prototype.
I was simply describing a change made by Devialet, perhaps due to a user reported issue, to set the Spark volume to a safe level together with the expectation that if the issue was reported they would also respond appropriately and prevent this occurrence with a software update (if that's at all possible?). Perhaps, even, recall the remotes.
Of course, the other more direct action would be to return the item stating that it is unfit for purpose. If sufficient remotes are returned, or not sold, then you would hope Devialet would get the message loud and clear.
(15-Sep-2015, 18:00)nigelb001 Wrote:(15-Sep-2015, 17:03)alandbush Wrote: I recently reported a change I did not like that was implemented with Spark 1.2.0.
It now changes the volume to a default value of 35 when the source is changed, eg. Tidal to optical.
The reply, which is probably sensible was
"Yes indeed, this is completely normal and a security measure.
The reason is that basically Spark does not know which source you are going to stream. However each source has a basic sound power.
Which is why for exemple you could stream optical content at 45% and get a correct Phantom volume, but then you skip to Deezer content and a 45% volume might blow your hears off.
So by security our engineers decided that each new sources reverts to a safe 35%."
I suspect that must have been at the request of a user experience.
So, although it should not be necessary, I would report your scary experience, if you have not already, and hope something can be actioned.
Read the original post again. The volume was at 100 due to someone fiddling with the remote while in mute. The gripe is that there was no indication on the remote that this had happened and would have been avoided had Devialet stuck to the original spec of the remote with a display of volume.
Devialet needs to be careful here as the original promises for this fantastic piece of Hi Fi equipment are not forthcoming. As long as these changes and delays (coming soon....) are happening, current and prospective customers are going to be very disappointed. The minor changes to Spark did not go anywhere near far enough and the lack of facilities for different streaming sources sadly continue to be lacking. Devialet needs to pull their fingers out and listen to stop alienating people. It's a shame as the Phantom has so much promise, but I suspect that the investors in Devialet are pushing for product volume and profits rather than the superb listening experience it could and should be.
It seems my reply was not as clear as I hoped it would be
I understand that there is no relation between the dangerous remote behaviour and the Spark update to the volume at source change. I appreciate that the current remote is an inept implementation of the proposed prototype.
I was simply describing a change made by Devialet, perhaps due to a user reported issue, to set the Spark volume to a safe level together with the expectation that if the issue was reported they would also respond appropriately and prevent this occurrence with a software update (if that's at all possible?). Perhaps, even, recall the remotes.
Of course, the other more direct action would be to return the item stating that it is unfit for purpose. If sufficient remotes are returned, or not sold, then you would hope Devialet would get the message loud and clear.
