FLO REFUND

[jwillis35]

18 hours ago, NakedEye said:

Other than the occasional major disaster, wasn't the sound in DCILive generally ok? Meaning that when the horns got louder, you heard an increase in volume?

My main beef with Aunt Flo is that when the horns come in, my volume always drops, like the microphones can't handle the increase and it all goes to a lower setting. So you are ready for the big hit and instead you get a whisper. So annoying. Of course you never don't hear the pit loud and clear.

This was part of what bothered me the other night. Often this could mean they've set compressors at the mixer level, which they should, but the input receive level is likely too low (meaning the compression begins acting at DB levels that should be left alone. In addition the actual compression could be real high, like 3:1 or higher.  They are likely afraid of distortion.  DCI LIVE was getting good at the sound.  My preference for a long time, however, has been that they do not put mics in the pit area or anywhere near the field. Put a left and right pair in the center, either mid way up or all the way up (depending on stadium), then put an additional stereo pair mid way up on each the 30.  Being somewhat further away will let the mics capture the full ensemble in its most pure form. If a pre-amp is needed to pull the sound better then do it.  Additionally, I have often thought that instead of pulling that sound into a mixer, go straight to an Apogee Symphony I/O Mk II 8×8 Configuration. These things have the best AD/DA converters. They will let you take the sound straight into a Pro Tools rig. There the sound can be mixed and then synced to the video feed. 

The real problem is likely uploading the stream to the internet and having a fast enough server than can handle the traffic. 

[Jim Schehr]

15 hours ago, Jeff Ream said:

actually DCI does care because farming it out, the profit margin was better for them with the savings in letting Flo deal with some of the licensing costs

I don't care about Flo or DCI's gross margins. It's there for those who can't afford to see a show live and in person. It's silly that people want money back. Some cry about Flo like they had to break their piggy bank to purchase the subscription. If you can't afford it don't purchase it. If you do purchase it look at the cost as a donation just like when you purchase a ticket and the show is rained out. If it doesn't meet your expectations cancel it and wait for your corps show to show up on YouTube, but quit poor mouthing the provider for taking your money and giving you crap in return. It was still better than watching the local news. 

Edited July 20, 2017 by Jim Schehr

[E3D]

15 hours ago, Stu said:

Flo certainly failed to provide quality service, and customers certainly should complain about that bad service.  However, the term Fleece is an informal idiom that means to 'steal' or 'defraud'.  Flo did not engage in either stealing from or defrauding the customers because the contract, which clearly states the warranty disclaimers, was signed and agreed upon by the customers.  Bad service, yes; Legalese CYA for the company, yes; but Fleecing, no.

Question - If you paid for HBO and they were to have a movie that you have been waiting to watch. They (HBO) have advertised this for weeks and the time has finally come. When the show starts it gets hung up in the broadcast (frozen in time first scene) then 28 minutes later you are already through a quarter of the movie and can't rewind it either, the kicker is even though the show is back running there is now ..NO SOUND. That seems a bit like fraud because you have not been able to watch the movie they have advertised. 

I'm very glad we have you here to define for us what a fleecing is and IS.

[mountaineers97]

3 hours ago, Cappybara said:

Be prepared for no response to your request, it seems that people have taken a liking on DCP to make a claim and then tell other people to look up evidence by themselves instead of providing it to back up their claim. 

Unfortunately that has become the norm.  Not just here but the Internet in general.  Not to get political but even major news organizations  (both liberal and conservative ) pretty much are retracting stories daily.  I remember when almost all retractions were due to misprint or getting a minor fact like a person's middle initial wrong was all you ever saw.  Now whole stories end up being false or mostly false.  The lines between opinion and fact have been mostly erased in today's social media environment. 

[garfield]

17 hours ago, Jim Schehr said:

I doubt that Flo or anyone from DCI cares if the experience with their productions are not meeting customers expectations. They got your money and you're not getting it back, bad internet streaming or not. 

No more than your local cable provider, who doesn't care, Flo doesn't care what you think. They don't care, and there will be NO refunds. Like Judge Judy has said time and time again; "you ate the steak you pay for it. Doesn't matter if you liked it or not."

Well, wait.  If I order a steak medium rare and it comes out burnt, am I entitled to a refund for the restaurant failing to deliver as promised?  

If I turn on the Flo-cast and it sucks, if I turn it off (and don't eat any more) can I send the steak back get my money back?

 

Lastly, I think comparing DCI or Flo to the cable companies is overly-harsh.  I think you're mistaken to believe that the people at DCI or Flo simply don't care about those who buy their service.  There are real human people answering phones at both places - to presume they are faceless corporations like cable companies mischaracterizes both the truth and the intent and motivations of both entities, IMO.

That doesn't say that Flo is worth a darn (I was pleased early-on) but it doesn't confirm that both of them "don't care".

 

Edited July 20, 2017 by garfield

[Cappybara]

9 minutes ago, mountaineers97 said:

Unfortunately that has become the norm.  Not just here but the Internet in general.  Not to get political but even major news organizations  (both liberal and conservative ) pretty much are retracting stories daily.  I remember when almost all retractions were due to misprint or getting a minor fact like a person's middle initial wrong was all you ever saw.  Now whole stories end up being false or mostly false.  The lines between opinion and fact have been mostly erased in today's social media environment. 

Yep. It's really sad.

[garfield]

13 hours ago, denmum said:

Jeff, since you brought it up, I completely agree with you. It seems that Stu got the whole story (Flo issued a refund) while you only got one-side of that story-or at least only reported one side. That pretty much sums up those 2 sources for news.

So your point was to bash a conservative new outlet on a drum corps forum board.

Thanks for that.

Jeesh.

[garfield]

4 hours ago, Cappybara said:

Be prepared for no response to your request, it seems that people have taken a liking on DCP to make a claim and then tell other people to look up evidence by themselves instead of providing it to back up their claim. 

Or trolling DCP to throw out some gasoline on their initial foray onto the forum.

 

[E3D]

In the case anyone wants to record the stream and watch it later - if you are on the road or busy with the family. You can just capture the crap video and audio from flo using a stream recorder. There are a few available for MAC and Windows. Movavi - jing - debut to name a few. 

 

 

[Stu]

56 minutes ago, E3D said:

Question - If you paid for HBO and they were to have a movie that you have been waiting to watch. They (HBO) have advertised this for weeks and the time has finally come. When the show starts it gets hung up in the broadcast (frozen in time first scene) then 28 minutes later you are already through a quarter of the movie and can't rewind it either, the kicker is even though the show is back running there is now ..NO SOUND. That seems a bit like fraud because you have not been able to watch the movie they have advertised. 

I'm very glad we have you here to define for us what a fleecing is and IS.

If HBO advertised the movie, solicited and accepted your fee by having you sign a contract stating that they are not responsible for technical glitches, and then 'deliberately sabotaged' the broadcast with no intent to provide you with excellent service, then that would be fraud-fleecing.

If HBO advertised the movie, solicited and accepted your fee by having you sign a contract stating that they are not responsible for technical glitches, and then those glitches unfortunately occurred during the broadcast 'with no intent by HBO to deliberately crash the broadcast', then that would be a technical malfunction (not) fraud-fleecing.

Demonstrate where Flomarching 'intentionally' crashed the live streams and I will be 100% on board with you in barking for legal action concerning defrauding-fleecing the customers!!!  Otherwise, if you are one who paid for the live-stream that had technical difficulties, you are just upset that you did not read disclaimer #6 prior to signing the contract agreement.

Oh, and for your last 'glad' remark; it is my pleasure to provide you with actual facts which define stealing and fraud, not just opinion.