| Author |
Message |
|
Sean O Stevens
Location: Grovetown, GA Joined: 22 Oct 2008
Posts: 208
|
 Posted: Sat 17 Mar, 2012 3:41 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Chad Arnow wrote: |
As has been mentioned, Albion has been criticized at times for their items being too perfect and sometimes lacking the handmade appeal that period pieces have. |
I certainly would never have made that critique... that is part of the appeal of an Albion sword for me... the idea that it will be a clean, crisp representation of the type. The idea that it should look and feel pretty much exactly like my buddy's version of the same sword, so I know what I'm getting.
I'll put my own nicks and patina on it over time. 
|
|
    |
 |
|
Charles Richmond
Location: Casstown Ohio Joined: 16 May 2011
Posts: 39
|
| Posted: Sat 17 Mar, 2012 3:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Brandt Giese wrote: |
As a side note I hold SBG somewhat responsible and for the life of me am dumbfounded that Darkswords receive higher ratings than Albion. |
The above may hold true as far as the durability ratings of the two manufacturers. Durability defined as how well it holds up to a steel pipe or a cinder block.
I can assure you that the greater majority of the board membership at SBG does know the difference between the two manufacturers in as far as it relates to quality, construction, and representation in the historical record.
When a member there asks for a recommendation at a price point beyond the $300 SBG focus, 9 times out of 10, an Albion Crecy will be tossed out as a recommendation for reasons that you are all well aware of.
As to myself, I dearly love fantasy inspired weaponry, and certain DSA pieces fill the bill quite nicely. This love of fantasy weapons doesn't conflict with my pursuit of weapons represented by the Oakeshott typology.
When I wanted an Anduril, I bought a DSA. When I wanted an XIX, I bought an Angus Trim. My first DSA purchase was based solely on its visual appearance, my first Arms and Armor purchase was based on a myArmoury review.
Please don't assume that just because I get all weak kneed over a two handed Orc Scimitar, that I do not fully appreciate the finer aspects of a well researched and executed representation of an XVIa,or for that matter Sean Flynts interpretation of the typical 15th century bastard sword shown here, yeah I bought that one from the marketplace.
There are many more like me who primarily dwell on the SBG board, because to be honest,over here at myArmoury I feel like I am eavesdropping at the door to the teachers lounge. You guys will laugh at my Windlass Eastern Barbarian Sword, while I listen to you chat about the Sutton Hoo finds.
Some insight into why DSA still has an audience if nothing else, no offense has been taken by me, and I assure you that I offer none in return.
Regards
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nick B.
Location: Upstate N.Y. Joined: 11 Apr 2007
Posts: 64
|
| Posted: Sat 17 Mar, 2012 5:16 pm Post subject: Darksword Armory |
|
|
Charles,
You said you have a DSA Anduril, how do you like it? Did it come with rust, grind marks, loose parts or misaligned parts? If you can post some pictures.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charles Richmond
Location: Casstown Ohio Joined: 16 May 2011
Posts: 39
|
| Posted: Sat 17 Mar, 2012 6:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The only part of the Anduril that is not spot on to the picures used as advertisement for it is the blade.
There was no rust present, but there is a distinctly wavy appearance to the blade surface. The waviness is plainly the result of the forging process, and subsequently the blade was not ground out to a flat surface, it was ground to pretty darn close and then polished out.
The resulting wavy appearance does lend the blade a distinctive hand made look, but on a blade that it is supposed to be an heirloom of the kings of Gondor, c'mon.
You may or may not be aware, but the grip leather is sewn together, with the seam running up the side of the grip. While displayed or worn, it is not readily visible, but in hand it is a bit uncomfortable. Gloves negate the effect somewhat depending on what you wear.
My Anduril is a very early model, DSA has made some efforts recently towards bringing the weight of their swords down to acceptable levels, and their blade work has improved, depending on who you ask of course. An Anduril of more recent production may very well have a better finished blade.
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Portman
|
| Posted: Sat 17 Mar, 2012 7:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Raymond Deancona wrote: | | Once again I have to weigh in, not about DSA, but a general trend I see in buyers, namely the mystifying (to me at least) behavior of accepting sub-par products merely because of a price point! Using the car analogy, when you buy a Hyundai, you don't expect the same level of quality as Mercedes, however you do expect both products to get you from point A to point B, and you certainly would not accept flat tires, rust, dings or no passenger seat when buying the Hyundai. The same has to be said of the re-enactment sword industry! It baffles me that a customer would allow any product, regardless of price to arrive with rust, dings, incomplete finishing, etc, and not demand their money back, including shipping to and from the seller! Building a solid sword is NOT a mysterious procedure, but for some reason quality control at the sellers' level seems to be in some cases. |
Seconded. Even the proverbial "sharpened crowbar" should arrive properly assembled and packed and free of rust, I should think!
Thou needest not to look at it. 'Tis even as thou seest, the leg is off.
|
|
|
|
|
Chad Arnow
myArmoury Team
|
| Posted: Sat 17 Mar, 2012 8:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Phil D. wrote: | the customer (as long as it is not just buyers remorse) should not be expected to pay an additional 30 + dollars even 3 times that internationally in return shipping to make things right . [snip] As an example, MRL backs their products so well as to send a prepaid return shipping label at no extra cost to it's customers when needed.
|
I don't disagree in concept and wish makers would cover shipping back to them in the event of error. The problem with that, though, is that companies have business conditions we agree to when we purchase something. Many companies don't cover the cost of shipping an item back to them. Albion's return policy asks that items be returned for repair or replacement, but doesn't expressly say they'll pay for it. They also charge a "redemption" (like a restocking) fee. Why would people expect them to deviate from their policy? if you don't like the policy, don't buy from them.  It's the buyer's job to know what they're getting into, even if the maker has vague or no info on their site about returns.
MRL is a different animal altogether. They're a retailer, not a maker. They're owned by the maker (Windlass), but they're a retailer like Kult of Athena or many others out there. They can return defective stock to the maker and will likely get a refund from Windlass for defective stuff meaning a return is not a huge deal as they won't have as much cost to eat. They're also dealing in larger volumes than Albion and are working at lower prices, so errors are less costly.
Regarding QC/item not as described issues, again we get into the debate about whether any deviation is acceptable and if so, how much. Makers would be better off stating that measurements are approximate and that actual specs may vary. But most don't do that and it causes trouble.
ChadA
http://chadarnow.com/
|
|
 |
|
J. Hargis
|
| Posted: Sun 18 Mar, 2012 8:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Brandt Giese said:
| Quote: | | As a side note I hold SBG somewhat responsible and for the life of me am dumbfounded that Darkswords receive higher ratings than Albion. |
And then how can any site like SBG claim to have unbiased forum discussions about manufacturers when in fact they are clearly biased toward one manufacturer?
I believe that the moderators here have made it clear that myArmoury does not engage in ratings for concerns of appearing biased, and for good reason.
In addition, a predominant factor concerning my low opinion of Darkswords Armoury comes down to what I feel is misrepresentation of their products. In my experiences, their descriptions and photos do not come close to representing what I have received. And even their claimed historical references for many of their swords are incorrect, as has been accurately pointed out at this forum. I mean, seriously.
Regards, Jon
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joe Fults
|
| Posted: Sun 18 Mar, 2012 8:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| J. Hargis wrote: | And then how can any site like SBG claim to have unbiased forum discussions about manufacturers when in fact they are clearly biased toward one manufacturer?
Regards, Jon |
The real rub for me with several forums over the years has come when they claim to be unbiased learning or social areas and then open stores selling products from specific vendors to fund their activities. Once you're a reseller, you're an agent of the company in question, and therefore no longer unbiased. Nothing wrong with that. Just don't go preaching that you're some vendor neutral association after you open a retail store, because once you register to resell somebody's product, you're not neutral anymore no matter how much you say you are! 
"The goal shouldn’t be to avoid being evil; it should be to actively do good." - Danah Boyd
|
|
|
|
|
Nathan Robinson
myArmoury Admin
|
| Posted: Sun 18 Mar, 2012 9:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joe Fults wrote: | | The real rub for me with several forums over the years has come when they claim to be unbiased learning or social areas and then open stores selling products from specific vendors to fund their activities. Once you're a reseller, you're an agent of the company in question, and therefore no longer unbiased. Nothing wrong with that. Just don't go preaching that you're some vendor neutral association after you open a retail store, because once you register to resell somebody's product, you're not neutral anymore no matter how much you say you are! |
I'm glad to read this, Joe.
This should be a concern to anyone in this community. I've had more opportunities than most to sell items on this site, represent makers on this site, or otherwise act as a distributor/vendor/agent. I've turned it all down. I've done this at a great cost to myself and have left a fair chunk of money on the table because of it. And why would I turn down an obvious source of personal income? Because it would destroy this site and create something completely different than what I set out to make.
Ironically and annoyingly enough, this site and me personally have been faced with accusations of affiliation with makers or organizations in spite of this being completely factually incorrect.
The truth is bias is more about perception than about reality. Sites like this or the others that are similar cannot control perception, but only influence it. Because of this, we have to be very careful with the choices we make. Opening up a shop, taking advertisement revenue, joining affiliate programs with vendors that make or sell items that are being reviewed, etc., etc. have to be carefully weighed because the the outcome is generally going to knock huge holes in the perception of bias, regardless of the reality of it being there or not.
.:. Visit my Collection Gallery :: View my Reading List :: View my Wish List :: See Pages I Like :: Find me on Facebook .:.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sean O Stevens
Location: Grovetown, GA Joined: 22 Oct 2008
Posts: 208
|
| Posted: Mon 19 Mar, 2012 5:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Good points by Joe and Nathan...
I would only add that, with site like SBG, while there is an inherent conflict of interest with the concept of a unbiased review and being a vendor/seller at the same time... many of the reviews to be found on SBG are submitted by members of the forum who have no affiliation with SBG in a financial way.
I'll use myself as an example.
I've submitted around 20+ reviews of various swords on SBG (And other sites such as Sword Nation and United Back Yard Cutters. Full disclosure, I'm the head moderator on the UBC Website... but have no official status with SBG or SwordNation.) and those reviews cover all sorts of swords from Katana to large Euro Warswords... and all price ranges from $150 Hanwei swords to $1800 Albion swords and custom Tinkers and Odinblades.
Never once has a moderator or rep from SBG or SwordNation (Which no longer operates as a sword seller but once did) asked or told me to alter or change anything in my reviews. Never once was any influence exerted from the operator of those websites.
I think the question of if the operator of site that both reviews and sells swords can be fair and impartial when it comes to giving an opinion on those swords is a VERY fair one. That said... the VAST majority of reviews to be found on a site like SBG come from independent members such as myself... who have no connection to or any stake in any one maker or vendor. So such reviews can be seen to be unbiased.
The 'ratings' system was a bad idea... and at least in the case of SBG, has not been used for about 3 years now or so I think. If one looks over the list of my old reviews... I think only one of them makes use of the numbered rating system.... the rest just give my impressions of the weapons as best I can... and provide pics and video.
I do think that... when it comes to building and maintaining a reputation for impartiality and independent, unbiased opinions on the subject... Nathan's model here on myArmoury is the better model by far. That said... I am only making the point that aside from the owner/operator himself and his moderators... questioning the impartiality of the opinions of reviewers who have done reviews on sites such as SBG would be, IMO, off the mark.
|
|
|
|
|
Chad Arnow
myArmoury Team
|
| Posted: Mon 19 Mar, 2012 6:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| J. Hargis wrote: | I believe that the moderators here have made it clear that myArmoury does not engage in ratings for concerns of appearing biased, and for good reason.
|
A bigger problem is that most rating systems tend to be arbitrary and try to put weapons with vastly different dates/origins/intended uses into the same box. It's all about context, not assigning a random number.
ChadA
http://chadarnow.com/
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charles Richmond
Location: Casstown Ohio Joined: 16 May 2011
Posts: 39
|
| Posted: Mon 19 Mar, 2012 6:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Many forum discussions on SBG are very hard on manufacturers, some of the very manufacturers that have products represented in the SBG store.
This is my experience, and my experience alone, but I have never seen an example of the board owner,or one of his agents, arbitrarily locking any thread that contained legitimate concerns about a manufacturer or craftsmans product.
That is assuming that the thread progresses in a civil manner, and no spurious claims are made.
Granted, the membership of SBG does tend to be dismissive of some faults with lower end products that would be regarded with abhorrence by members here, but we again come back to the the differences in perceptions that are prevalant between the two boards.
As an aside-
It may be pleasing to you, the myArmoury staff and members, to know that on several occasions there have been arguments, debates, or misconceptions cleared up with the simple posting of a link to a thread on this board.
Not that it is taken as absolute gospel and then engraved upon a stone tablet, but it is recognized that the discourse on a subject here is as close to that as it can come.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bryan W.
|
| Posted: Mon 19 Mar, 2012 8:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Durability, performance, weight/balance, aesthetics, historical accuracy (which encompasses all of the above to an extent) and Price are factors among others that most end up looking at.
In addition, many (or most really) look at who is producing the weapons as well since public relations, consistency, quality control, and communication also count.
While there are plenty of exceptions, the population trends on focus are fairly well known. Some have different priorities and in a sense that is due to the purpose for acquiring a sword. Some are more focused on historical accuracy, others on sparring performance. Some like to just look at their blades on a wall and others are more concerned about price point and how well they can cut milk jugs with it in the backyard. Are any of these "wrong"? No. I find this to be an old argument and it's generally accepted that the general population of the forums have different priorities at this point in time.
Speaking as a member/reader of most of the popular forums these days, there's going to be bias everywhere as new board members are influenced (or educated) by older ones. I remember a couple years ago jumping on the A&A bandwagon because of the glowing reviews of this forum (and I am still a proud card carrying member of that bandwagon). Whether those older members were influenced themselves is irrelevant now.
Back to the original topic though....
I looked at DSA for various reasons several times, more because I had heard about massive improvements they were making and I just like to stay informed. At this point I can say I'm hesitant to order anything from them not because of quality control, or complaints about overbuilding, or lack of historical accuracy or anything of the sort.
I'm hesitant more because of the recent responses from Eyal Azerad on this forum which I find evasive and border on passive aggressiveness in tone.
As a potential consumer/client/customer I am surprised and a bit taken aback that a manufacturer/business man would post such comments and avoid questions. I note the tone to be very different than his posts elsewhere which leads me to believe that he has taken some offense here. (EDIT: And after rereading the full thread again I can see why)
I frankly don't care what the reason is though. The burden of proof unfortunately is always with the professional, lest they lose business. It's unprofessional to let emotions get the best of oneself even when customers are acting as such. I don't ever want to be in a situation where I have to deal with someone who will falter in professionalism if I, as a customer, inadvertently upset them. I shouldn't have that burden and none of my own "customers" ever should with me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Portman
|
| Posted: Mon 19 Mar, 2012 9:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bryan W. wrote: | I'm hesitant more because of the recent responses from Eyal Azerad on this forum which I find evasive and border on passive aggressiveness in tone.
As a potential consumer/client/customer I am surprised and a bit taken aback that a manufacturer/business man would post such comments and avoid questions. I note the tone to be very different than his posts elsewhere which leads me to believe that he has taken some offense here. (EDIT: And after rereading the full thread again I can see why)
I frankly don't care what the reason is though. The burden of proof unfortunately is always with the professional, lest they lose business. It's unprofessional to let emotions get the best of oneself even when customers are acting as such. I don't ever want to be in a situation where I have to deal with someone who will falter in professionalism if I, as a customer, inadvertently upset them. I shouldn't have that burden and none of my own "customers" ever should with me. |
That's my reaction as well. It's the avoidance of the issue, with the complaints directly there on the page, along with, secondarily, the petulant tone, provoked though it may have been, that really sets off alarm bells. I find it mystifying, frankly.
Thou needest not to look at it. 'Tis even as thou seest, the leg is off.
|
|
|
|
|
Glen A Cleeton
|
| Posted: Mon 19 Mar, 2012 9:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Back to the original topic though.. |
The original topic was my posting a link to a retailer that sells Dark Sword Armory goods along with others. The specifics of that thread starter related to a section on that site showing manufacture of Weapon Edge goods. It was then determined that the section pointed out did not relate to Dark Sword Armory at all. The way the site originally posted the information, it read as more than Weapon Edge responsible for various offerings.
Cheers
GC
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joe Fults
|
| Posted: Mon 19 Mar, 2012 2:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sean O Stevens wrote: | | That said... I am only making the point that aside from the owner/operator himself and his moderators... questioning the impartiality of the opinions of reviewers who have done reviews on sites such as SBG would be, IMO, off the mark. |
Sean, the issue is not the reviews and reviewers per-say, and I would agrue that the issue is what the site bills itself as and what it does (also how it behaves). To be fair I don't spend enough time at SBG to know how it bills itself or how the people running it behave, so I'll make no claims about SBG. However, SFI on the other hand, aggressively billed itself as academic back in the day. Then SFI started selling Armart. Then Atrim and then who knows what else. At the risk of being too blunt, it became a real problem to me that SFI sold Atrim swords and as a moderator Angus made sure I understood that he could and would ban me at any time if I voiced any concern with his products or practices, at the unbiased academic internet association in question. Baby and bathwater be damned, SFI and its academic integrity went out the window for me at that point!
Conversely, Amazon reviews are great tools for buyers but Amazon does not bill itself as an academic forum or as a association of interested parties. Its a store pure and simple. It says its a store.
Basically I'm suggesting that once you become a retailer, claiming to be anything else and claiming that you are unbiased about the products you are selling is problematic. None of this necessarily means that the opinions of third parties are any more or less valid at the store than at other places. It just means that the ground should not be blindly trusted to be neutral there.
"The goal shouldn’t be to avoid being evil; it should be to actively do good." - Danah Boyd
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joe Fults
|
| Posted: Mon 19 Mar, 2012 2:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
AND sorry about the thread detour.
"The goal shouldn’t be to avoid being evil; it should be to actively do good." - Danah Boyd
|
|
|
|
|
Glen A Cleeton
|
| Posted: Mon 19 Mar, 2012 3:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joe Fults wrote: | | AND sorry about the thread detour. |
In a sense, that is what off topic means to me, so no worry aside from later perceptions of intent. The thread went from a site to fact finding, which is kind of what I was about but then has evolved to a customer service discussion being raised from the dead. Since then it seems to have been an opportunity for bi partisan ramblings about various forums instead of the swords or the maker.
Me? I'd still actually like to see real shop work going on in the DSA forge instead of reading about inventory in garages being sharpened after the shop has finished involvement with them. At the same time, I know I am not the only one that has seen the progression of product in the past decade or so. A good many on several boards are relatively new to the whole market and are all too easily led and actually misled as to how money might be best spent.
Also from my own perspective is that I have probably offended more makers and customers of the popular at times. Dark Sword is not a first choice I would ever suggest but at the same time preach to do the research and buy what appeals to someone. To be honest though, I am more interested in more complete disclosure and accuracy of descriptions than the product I see coming out of the marque. For functional off the shelf fantasy, they are possibly a valid choice. Pretty sells and pretty is in the eye of the beholder.
Cheers
GC
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sean O Stevens
Location: Grovetown, GA Joined: 22 Oct 2008
Posts: 208
|
| Posted: Mon 19 Mar, 2012 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joe... I absolutely agree with you on this.
The only point I was trying to make was that SBG is, by and large, contributor content and not ownership content... at least, the forums are. Paul himself has had less and less direct involvement with the day to day activities there... and the lions share of all the reviews and opinions offered in the threads there nowadays are member content from people like myself who have NO financial stake in SBG or its store and products.
I would totally understand why someone would question the merits of a review from Paul on a sword that he sells on his site. I'm not trying to imply he is unable to be objective, I'm just saying there is a conflict of interest and I, myself, being a generally skeptical person see the issues with that clearly. However... the membership of the forums there have no connection to the storefront or the products represented... and, in my personal experience, have never been prevented from expressing our honest opinions. I have many times myself spoken in less then glowing terms of weapons that are sold at SBG's storefront... and have never been censored in doing so.
|
|
|
|
|
Chad Arnow
myArmoury Team
|
| Posted: Mon 19 Mar, 2012 5:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sean O Stevens wrote: | the lions share of all the reviews and opinions offered in the threads there nowadays are member content from people like myself who have NO financial stake in SBG or its store and products.
|
Is SBG still offering free or discounted swords to reviewers as they used to?
ChadA
http://chadarnow.com/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic