Davy Spillane Low D Review

Phil Hardy · Post by **Phil Hardy** » Sat May 21, 2005 2:24 am

Retracted.

Post by **Dale** » Sat May 21, 2005 7:21 am

Phil Hardy wrote:...and another thing while we're on the subject.

Q.howcome it's cool for me to write a review of a competitors whistle ie Paul Busmans Blackwood high D...IF..i really like it and say cool things about it...it is still just my opinion and you can take it as you like?

Because it's not self-serving to say favorable things about a competitor.

Phil Hardy wrote:]]
Point...I'd just like to be able to voice an opinion as a player,the business side of things takes care of itself and does not benefit from what I say or don't say on these boards.People buy our whistles regardless of what is said.

I don't want to knock Mr S's whistle just to voice a dissapiontment in what could have been something special.

Phil.

Phil, I don't have any way of knowing what your motives are when you post negatively about a competitor and I'm happy to give you the benefit of the doubt that you don't intend to promote your own products when you do so. But, think about it: If it were okay for whistlemakers to come on the board and critique each others work, it would just get ridiculous. As someone else pointed out, it's no coincidence that most whistlemakers don't do this on the board. They understand that it is unseemly and makes them look bad. You've got your defenders on this issue and, as I've been learning lately, the board is now big enough that there's not going to be a single issue on which some folks are going to disagree.

You are obviously a talented and enthusiastic whistle player and under normal circumstances, your impressions of different whistles would be valuable. But you can't possibly be objective. In the case of Davy's whistle, there are, what, three makers of plastic-topped Low D whistles on the planet. You're one of them and Davy's another. You simply have a conflict of interest and it couldn't be any more self-explanatory which is why I've had to spend this time explaining it, I guess.

Phil Hardy wrote:
PS,I have posted an "at length" look at this whole thing on the www.kerrywhistles.com messageboard.

Well, that's fine. And, of course, everytime you announce here that you've added something to your website (which is, as say on my website, is a VERY fine website) you're making a commercial post. Now, you will, of course, deny this. But kerrywhistles.com is, all it's interesting, educational, and entertaining content, a site on which you promote and sell your products. That's commercial.

Post by **Dale** » Sat May 21, 2005 7:33 am

...and while we're on the subject:

I just read your post on your own website about this and, as you know, you refer to this board as

Sniff and Snivel

Ok. So, look. Lately, given my recent role as the suppressor of free speech, I've been known to call it worse things.

But I'm just amazed at your willingess to take this kind of jab at the board, a board which, yes, you have contributed to, but also a board which you use regularly. Apparently you use it for a reason. Maybe you enjoy it. Maybe you benefit from it. Maybe it advances your products and your website. So, how very ill-mannered of you take that kind of silly swipe at a board on which you have posted 320 times. We know that you must benefit or enjoy it because when you leave in an angry huff, you always come back. Sniffling and sniveling, perhaps, but you come back.

Phil Hardy · Post by **Phil Hardy** » Sat May 21, 2005 8:04 am

Removed

Goldie · Post by **Goldie** » Sat May 21, 2005 8:04 am

...and while we're on the subject:

I just read your post on your own website and ask you not to refer to me or Bernard in the future especially as your memory is not the best and history seems to keep changing (can be seen from your posts on C&F or GC).

I am not interested in being dragged into any of your rantings and I do not agree with me being pseudo-quoted to try and strenghten/or backup the points you may try and put across even if I did say it but especially when it is BS. I have my own voice and contribute when I feel it is appropriate or needed.

Colin

Phil Hardy · Post by **Phil Hardy** » Sat May 21, 2005 8:11 am

Removed.

Post by **Dale** » Sat May 21, 2005 8:15 am

Phil Hardy wrote:.I say nothing about whistles I don't like and heap praise on the one I do

Good. Stick to that and it will make this discussion mostly moot.

Post by **Dale** » Sat May 21, 2005 8:18 am

Phil Hardy wrote:.....it;s fun or are you so sensitive that you have no sense of humor?.

Yeah. Damn. I never have had one of those.

Phil Hardy · Post by **Phil Hardy** » Sat May 21, 2005 8:34 am

I'd like to wish Davy every success with his new venture and hope that it gives him the same success that he has enjoyed with his marvelous music.
Good luck Davy.
Phil;.

IDAwHOa · Post by **IDAwHOa** » Sat May 21, 2005 8:41 am

DaleWisely wrote:
Phil Hardy wrote:Well,Ive just surfaced from the the slavery of house refurbishment and have just read the Spillane whistle review.
WHAT IS ALL THE FUSS ABOUT?
The clip sound OK the whistle looks like a Howard...I can't belive that Davy didn't do any homework or just come up with something more interesting.
The cost of the mould would be around $30-$40,000,thats a lot of wonga to spend on a project without really knowing your market.The tube is proberbly extruded at around $5 per metre.The cost of each headshell would be around $1.50.
With assembly and polishing and without engraving the whole thing would cost davy around $10-$15.
At a cost to the public of over $200 he must think that his past rep will sell them by the shedload.
And it's not even got his name on it.
I just feel a little sad that all the fuss of what could have been the worlds greatest low D ended up as a Howard.
Phil.
This is an entirely self-serving post, since you're a competitor. I ask you, publicly now, not to do this.

Dale

Does Phil manufacture the Howard whistle?

Azalin · Post by **Azalin** » Sat May 21, 2005 9:23 am

I'm surprised and impressed at the amount of time Dale spent justifying why Phil isnt allowed to post his negative opinion about another whistle maker. I would have nuked him long before that. I hope to be as wise and patient as you one day Dale

As for Phil, it think he really understands what's it all about, but is trying to play smart and get the best of both world. After a few of his posts, you end up with a url to his website hidden through some information to please the ignorant reader. To me it's very simple, a whistle maker should be allowed to express his opinion on this board if he/she never uses the board for commercial purpose, which means no url to website, never, no mention of "my whistles", etc. Chiff & Fipple is doing whistle makers a BIG favor concerning commercial posts, which doesnt cost anything to them, and there's clearly abuse going on from a few of them.

Post by **Dale** » Sat May 21, 2005 9:29 am

Azalin wrote:I'm surprised and impressed at the amount of time Dale spent justifying why Phil isnt allowed to post his negative opinion about another whistle maker.

Yeah, but see, I'm supposed to be cleaning the garage.

Cynth · Post by **Cynth** » Sat May 21, 2005 9:32 am

Yep.

barstool · Post by **barstool** » Sat May 21, 2005 9:52 am

Wow, just wow

~B

Post by **Dale** » Sat May 21, 2005 9:58 am

Cynth wrote: Yep.

You knew, didn't you. You must be married. To a man.

Actually, I AM cleaning the garage. This is just giving me a good excuse for breaks.

Chiff and Fipple Forums