A disturbing trend here

[tfarney]

Chris, you seem to be shutting down a few threads lately. Threads that are not particularly contentious, threads in which there has been no name-calling or rancor to speak of; threads that are only controversial because people are disagreeing in them...or perhaps because they are disagreeing with you.

 

The most recent example is the one about the DAC1 Pre. Ashley stated an opinion that he has stated repeatedly, yes. An opinion which, by the way, you mis-characterized in your response. Then you invited him to go express his opinions elsewhere and locked the thread.

 

It is your playground, of course, and you can play any way you choose here, but that was simply bad form. I think in your excitement over a newly-active collection of subjectivists who support what is, evidently, your own point of view, you may have forgotten that there is an equally large group of active members here who do not agree that $1,000 DACs are necessarily better for playback than the straightforward ones built into good digital components, that clipping tubes sound more "natural" than plenty of solid state headroom, that mp3s are the spawn of the devil and that esoteric power cords are anything more than a delivery system for the disposable incomes of the gullible.

 

There are a lot of people here who, I suspect, share much if not all of the viewpoint you seem to want to surpress. Off the top of my head, BobH, Shenzi, Rosevall, AV/OCD, markr, mike19, mpmct, AV/OCD, audioelf, honeybadger, jeffca, davidpettiford, BEEMB come to mind. I'm sure there are several more. Your lack of objectivity is bound to drive some of them away it time. Personally, my time is about up. I don't care how many times Ashley expresses his opinion about DAC design. It is a perfectly valid one when it is stated plainly instead of misrepresented. Telling him to move on because he doesn't believe in expensive audiophile DACs is actually way beyond bad form. It's dumb. Because I suspect you're unknowingly telling a whole lot more people than Ashley that they don't really belong here.

 

Tim

 

 

[jcbrum]

I will second your thoughts and feelings Tim.

 

If others agree, they too should speak up please.

 

JCBrum.

 

[alex1122]

Tim. Do not go. Yet. I find your posts of the sane, lucid variety, and without more of that sort, this site will turn into another silly audiophile voodoo forum. I am a noob here, but not in the high end stereo world. I was HOPING that the new digital stuff would bring about a saner, more rational following, where we can all agree that few hundreds, not many thousands, can get us the same, if not better sounds from our speakers.

 

Just my opinion. (See more of same in Chris's airport express forum on the main page)

 

[BobH]

I disagree. Sort of.

 

I'm all for disagreements, there would be no discussion without them. But I am also of the opinion that the constant repetition of the same message, on every thread into which in can be worked, is ultimately not helpful. I also feel that the tone of such 'messages' can be somewhat hectoring. I have expressed just this point, recently.

 

There are many degrees of 'audiophile', some we may agree with and some we may not and it is difficult, sometimes, to know when to leave well alone. But if every 'technical' discussion is battered down to the lowest common denominator then no-one benefits.

 

YMMV, of course.

 

[BEEMB]

 

I hadn't seen the particular post that you mention Tim.

 

These forum walls have always allowed pretty much any discussion to take place, which is a big part of the attraction.

 

I'm pleased that we can discuss the 'trend' though and sort things out.

 

Matt.

 

 

 

 

[shenzi]

But I notice on one of the threads we're into burning in cables and solid state electronics, without any hint of irony. I guess I'll just pick and choose which threads to bother with in future and avoid the smoke generators

 

[tfarney]

"I was HOPING that the new digital stuff would bring about a saner, more rational following."

 

So was I.

 

Tim

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Tim - In my opinion and according to every member and Fellow of the Audio Engineering Society (AES) that I have contacted, Ashley is extremely incorrect. There is much more to this than meets the eye. I have an ongoing exchange with Ashley via personal email which has contributed to everything lately as well. I've backed up my opinion with some of the brightest opinions available and Ashley discounts those opinions not based on fact but opinion that they are irrelevant. I've also asked Ashley to present his views to the AES for peer review. He refused to do this. I made it clear that I would be willing to accept his views if the AES said they were valid. He refused to do this. I'm not an engineer and think the only answer to this "debate" is to ask the people who know this stuff inside and out.

 

I encourage opinions of all sorts around here, but when someone is determined to misuse facts and science in a way that helps them sell products and I can't let that go on. Just because Ashley doesn't mention his product specifically in his posts does not mean he isn't advertising through his posts by misrepresenting facts in a light that hurts others and helps him. Stating that virtually every other company and engineer is incorrect, with the exception of his small circle of engineers, does nothing but steer readers to his products.

 

On another note, I support both objective and subjective viewpoints. If you count all the comments around here that disagree with me I think you'll find several hundred. The fact that I've locked a few threads in which I believe incorrect information is being put forth by a manufacturer and that manufacturer endlessly puts forth those "facts" is really inconsequential in the big picture.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Mr.C]

Thread comment of Ashley James: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/Review-Dac1-Pre#comment-15196

Response: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/Review-Dac1-Pre#comment-15214

 

Personally, I see locking the thread as an overreaction because it doesn't leave place for a reply or justification. I also interpret Ashley's comments differently than "there is no difference between a squeezebox and a Weiss dac. The way I see it, he meant that if a company can fulfill all the requirements for feeding a clean input to a dac chip and getting a clean output, there should be little difference no matter what the cost is. Therefore, it is perfectly plausible for the DAC1 to be at the same level as the Weiss stuff. However, if it is impossible to fulfill the requirements of the dac chip at that price level, then there is no way that the DAC1 would be at the same level.

 

[tfarney]

"For the Record, Tim

 

I disagree. Sort of.

 

I'm all for disagreements, there would be no discussion without them. But I am also of the opinion that the constant repetition of the same message, on every thread into which in can be worked, is ultimately not helpful. I also feel that the tone of such 'messages' can be somewhat hectoring. I have expressed just this point, recently.

 

There are many degrees of 'audiophile', some we may agree with and some we may not and it is difficult, sometimes, to know when to leave well alone. But if every 'technical' discussion is battered down to the lowest common denominator then no-one benefits.

 

YMMV, of course. :)"

 

There are a couple of points that have, no doubt, been made repeatedly. I can't speak for Ash, but I can tell you I've repeated them not because I was working them in anywhere they'd fit, but because I was repeating them where the repetition was made necessary because someone was promoting "high-end" gear of marginal, if not downright questionable value over solutions that could get almost anyone started in computer audio with sound at least as good as what they get from their cd players.

 

I think, perhaps, I misunderstood the mission of CA from the beginning. I think, perhaps, the "audiophile" comes first. I just never expected the fringe tweako variety on a computer as source site. My mistake.

 

Tim

 

[jtwrace]

How about a manufacturer section? This way, weather they are a site supporter or not, they can debate, advertise as they wish. At the end of the day, it's still up to the consumer....

 

The joy of online forums.

 

[Purite Audio]

Ashley Giles, and a small circle of his acolyte's have been bombarding UK Hi Fi fora for the last year, every post is aimed at selling product nothing more. Just check out Hi-Fi Wigwam or Pink Fish Media or the Art of Sound. He attacks 'legacy' products ( separate hi-fi components ) because his little speakers are active, he attacks passive crossovers , he denies the difference in sound quality between DACS ( because the dac is built into his product ).

It is all rather sad and smacks of desperation, although there have been lighthearted moments ,for example when JC Brum, was posting on AOS under teo different pseudonyms and forgot to log out and re log in before answering a question, that was a hoot.

 

[tfarney]

"I encourage opinions of all sorts around here, but when someone is determined to misuse facts and science in a way that helps them sell products and I can't let that go on. Just because Ashley doesn't mention his product specifically in his posts does not mean he isn't advertising through his posts by misrepresenting facts in a light that hurts others and helps him. Stating that virtually every other company and engineer is incorrect, with the exception of his small circle of engineers, does nothing but steer readers to his products."

 

Because SteveN of Empirical Audio, as an example, enthusiastically promotes the opposite viewpoint, and his own "facts" in a light that hurts others and helps him and in fact DOES mention his products specifically in his posts. He has even been known to make pretty outrageous claims about them. Honestly, do you think that stating, on these pages, that his DAC "crushes" anything at less than 10 times its cost is closer to the truth and less damaging to competitors than "all competent DACs sound more or less the same?" He has said it more than once, and yet he gets a pass from you.

 

I'm sorry to say so, but I can only look at the two examples and conclude that the difference is not that Ash's argument is less rational or more damaging, but that SteveN's POV is more in line with your own.

 

I'm not arguing that Ash doesn't state his opinions bluntly and in way that leaves little room to wiggle. And I'm not arguing that they're aren't alternate "facts" to be presented and supported.

 

I'm arguing that two varieties of the "facts" are being treated quite differently here.

 

Tim

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Hi Tim - You are 100% correct. Fortunately I have begin monitoring very closely all post by Steve and will not allow a double standard. Ashley and Steve will not be treated differently. Thanks for mentioning this.

 

[markr]

Whatinthehellisgoingon? OK. Ashley occasionally annoys me. I don't loath him, I kind of like him really - he does bring some crystal clear sanity to the mix. He is valuable here. While I do feel that MP3's are the spawn of the devil - FOR REGULAR PLAYBACK people, I use them for reference and stop-gap purposes... - I definitely am not into $1200 power cables or any of that sort of stuff which I deem fakery. That is my opinion. That is what I think this website is for. Opinions and information.

 

I can see Chris's side, the cacophony of posts coming in that may or may absolutely not help, and might in fact hurt people in their search for solutions. I sometimes wonder if there could be a way to suppress some of that disinformation short of deleting posts. I don't see that there is. It is up to us to try and moderate incorrect information.... Maybe we could do a better, or at least a more civil job of that sometimes. I also don't see that Ashley is part of that problem; redundant maybe, but not the problem. I submit that moderating this place could not be easy. It is quite 'free form' and I believe that is what draws people here while at the same time making it a hard place to make sense of sometimes. Nevertheless, people repeatedly come here for help after studying it and its 'wondrous' complexity and then thank Chris for running 'tha dang thing.

 

Right now I have to suppose that something got posted at the DAC1 Pre thread that 'went out of bounds' somehow Tim, and that I didn't see it. I hope that is true. It is sad that this has to be this way.

 

Chris, does it have to be this way?

 

markr

 

EDIT: Ok, I saw the posts that came up while I was composing this piece of crap.... I have to lean to the side of Chris in this case. While I think that recording studios will buy what they can afford and that doesn't necessarily denote a superior product, why won't Ashley submit his data to AES? I have to say that I DO NOT believe we have this thing of accurately representing sound absolutely faithfully in recordings or upon playback totally figured out. I think that there is absolutely room for improvement, though I am sure that it isn't 'Brilliant Pebbles' that will do it. As confusing as this may be to some, and also acknowledging that it will cause panic in the folks that want to buy something now and never have to purchase anything ever again, I believe that it is true. I think though that we are now down to the short hairs and the coming improvements will be small. I'm all for continuing research and not standing on decaying laurels. Though I think that my laurel is decaying - need to go do some yardwork.

 

[tfarney]

You can see everything that was posted at the DAC1 thread by reading it. No posts have been deleted to my knowledge. But in the last week or so, 3 threads have been locked -- no more activity allowed. When there were no personal attacks or problems, really, to be found other than a people stating points of view that have been stated here before, but were clearly relevant to the threads in question.

 

Tim

 

[tfarney]

They should be treated differently. Ashley is arguing his personal point of view that is inevitably reflected in his company's products. The only way to avoid that would be to not allow audio manufacturers to post to the forum at all. SteveN is, while not as active on the forum as Ash, actively promoting his products, by name, with outrageous claims that are a challenge and an insult to every competitive product.

 

YMMV, but all I would have to do is look over the man's website to know I'd need to watch him like hawk.

 

Tim

 

[BEEMB]

Firstly, can I say that I'm slightly disappointed to be reading this.

 

This site aims to help people moving over into the great world of computer audio and I believe IT DOES ACHIEVE just that. When beginners post a question on here, nine times out of ten, they get it answered.

 

BobH - agree with your stance. And Shenzi, I'm certainly not bailing as I have far too much fun on here.

 

Ashley - if you're reading which I know you are, then PLEASE note Chris' comment "I've backed up my opinion with some of the brightest opinions available and Ashley discounts those opinions not based on fact but opinion that they are irrelevant" ... I state this as you tell us to accept fact but don't agree with facts from others. There is more in this world than a Mac connected to the ADM's.

 

Chris - please don't block threads as I agree with the comment above that blocking allows questions to remain unanswered for some of us. If there are no personal attacks, then even if you find repeated comments annoying, do let them run their course.

 

Coops - maybe I'm being thick, but could you please explain your comment re forgetting to log in/out. Are you suggesting that the same person is using two accounts?

 

Tim - I'm a little disappointed by your tweako comment. I like to tweak my PC and play around with it a bit ... Why should that cause anybody else concern? There are a few of us that do it, and enjoy doing it. Computing is a hobby of mine, aswell as music. I listen to and compare different media players, different types of compression. I'm not the only person here who can hear a difference. I'm not sure where you're coming from.

 

But to summarise ... come on guys - let's get back to normal please. No more closing threads, no more 'Im correct and what I say is true and nothing else' .. let's just remember that even the top enginners, anywhere, will never agree on everything. This is proof!!

 

 

Matt.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BEEMB]

 

... now off to get incredibly drunk ...

So I best not post later!

 

[Purite Audio]

BEEMB Hi, I don't know whether JC Brum is posting under two pseudonyms here, but he did on the Art of Sound forum, JC Brum was asked whether he knew 'hellraiser' ( can't remember the exact user name but something like that ) he replied while still logged on as hellraiser that he had no idea who 'hellraiser '

was and had certainly nothing to do with him!

'They' were preyty quickly banned of course, but a hoot at the time.

 

[markr]

"You can see everything that was posted at the DAC1 thread by reading it. "

 

I see it. I hadn't noticed the other threads that you speak of. I don't see a 'death sentence warranted in this thread though'. I have a feeling that this is really between Ash and Chris - things that we possibly don't know about. I don't see how shutting down threads does any good at all (CHRIS) - but I do know that it is sometimes necessary in extreme cases, and in fact I do see how it can actually do harm to one or both viewpoints. On the other hand ... Ashley does repeat himself pretty rigidly to the point of it becoming a monologue instead of a dialogue. I can understand that too. If you have something you believe in, you BELIEVE it (OK Ash, you can 'prove' it too). I can chose. I can tune that out. What I am not seeing is a meeting in the middle ground by Ashley. I see Chris repeatedly trying to get there, but not Ashley. This, after all is part of the mythos of Ashley, no? Opinionated and uncompromising. Controversial. I admire him for it. I can be quite the cranky sort as well. I don't know that these discussions rate that behavior though. This may be unsolvable. I hope not though!

 

- rkram (anagram of markr)

 

[cfmsp]

 

 

"Stating that virtually every other company and engineer is incorrect, with the exception of his small circle of engineers, does nothing but steer readers to his products."

 

 

Chris, you have my unconditional support on this matter, including all opinions you've expressed in this thread, and especially the one quoted above.

 

clay

 

 

 

 

[audiozorro]

I see the Spring Equinox is affecting folks here too, but what does any of this have to do with my music?

 

Cultural aspects of the equinox

 

Bas-relief in Persepolis - a symbol Zoroastrian Nowruz - on the day of a spring equinox, the power of an eternally fighting bull (personifying the Earth) and that of a lion (personifying the Sun), are equal

 

• The Persian new year, Nowruz, is held annually on the vernal equinox, as the beginning of spring.

• Wiccans and Neopagans celebrate the Sabbats of Ostara on the spring equinox, and Mabon on the autumnal equinox.

• The September equinox marks the first day of Mehr or Libra in the Persian calendar. It is one of the Iranian festivals called Jashne Mihragan, or the festival of sharing or love in Zoroastrianism.

• Sham El Nessim was an ancient Egyptian holiday which can be traced back as far as 2700 B.C. It is still one of the public holidays in Egypt. Sometime during Egypt's Christian period (c. 200-639) the date moved to Easter Monday, but before then it coincided with the vernal equinox.

• The Jewish Passover usually falls on the first full moon after the Northern Hemisphere vernal equinox, although occasionally (4 or 5 times every 19 years) it will occur on the second full moon.

• The Christian churches calculate Easter as the first Sunday after the first full moon on or after the March equinox. The official church definition for the equinox is March 21; however, as the Eastern Orthodox Churches use the older Julian calendar, while the Western Churches use the Gregorian calendar, both of which designate March 21 as the equinox, the actual date of Easter differs. The earliest possible Easter date in any year is therefore March 22 on each calendar.

• The March equinox marks the first day of various calendars including the Iranian calendar and the Bahá'í calendar. The Persian (Iranian) festival of Nowruz is celebrated then. According to the ancient Persian mythology Jamshid, the mythological king of Persia, ascended to the throne on this day and each year this is commemorated with festivities for two weeks. These festivities recall the story of creation and the ancient cosmology of Iranian and Persian people. It is also a holiday for Azerbaijan, Afghanistan, India, Turkey, Zanzibar, Albania, and various countries of Central Asia, as well as among the Kurds. As well as being a Zoroastrian holiday, it is also a holy day for adherents of the Bahá'í Faith and the Nizari Ismaili Muslims.

• The traditional East Asian calendars divide a year into 24 solar terms (??, literally "climatic segments"), and the vernal equinox (Ch?nf?n, Chinese and Japanese: ??; Korean: ??; Vietnamese: Xuân phân) and the autumnal equinox (Qi?f?n, Chinese and Japanese: ??; Korean: ??; Vietnamese: Thu phân) mark the middle of the spring and autumn seasons, respectively. In this context, the Chinese character ? means "(equal) division" (within a season).

• In Japan, (March) Vernal Equinox Day (???? Shunbun no hi) is an official national holiday, and is spent visiting family graves and holding family reunions. Similarly, in September, there is an Autumnal Equinox Day (???? Sh?bun no hi).

• The Mid-Autumn Festival is celebrated on the 15th day of the 8th lunar month, oftentimes near the autumnal equinox day, and is an official holiday in many East Asian countries. As the lunar calendar is not synchronous with the Gregorian calendar, this date could be anywhere from mid-September to early October.

• Tamil and Bengali New Years follow the Hindu zodiac and are celebrated according to the sidereal vernal equinox (April 14). The former is celebrated in the South Indian state of Tamil Nadu, and the latter in Bangladesh and the East Indian state of West Bengal.

• In many Arab countries, Mother's Day is celebrated on the March equinox.

• The harvest festival in the United Kingdom is celebrated on the Sunday of the full moon closest to the September equinox.

• Modern innovations:

o The September equinox was "New Year's Day" in the French Republican Calendar, which was in use from 1793 to 1805. The French First Republic was proclaimed and the French monarchy was abolished on September 21, 1792, making the following day (the equinox day that year) the first day of the "Republican Era" in France. The start of every year was to be determined by astronomical calculation, (that is: following the real Sun and not the mean Sun as all other calendars).

o World Storytelling Day is a global celebration of the art of oral storytelling, celebrated every year on the spring equinox in the northern hemisphere, the first day of autumn equinox in the southern.

o World Citizen Day occurs on the March equinox.

o Earth Day was initially celebrated on March 21, 1970, the equinox day. It is currently celebrated in various countries on April 22.

o In Annapolis, Maryland, USA, boatyard employees and sailboat owners celebrate the spring equinox with the Burning Of The Socks festival. Traditionally, the boating community wears socks only during the winter. These are burned at the approach of warmer weather, which brings more customers and work to the area. Officially, nobody then wears socks until the next equinox.

 

Myths, fables and facts

 

• One effect of equinoctial periods is the temporary disruption of communications satellites. For all geostationary satellites, there are a few days near the equinox when the sun goes directly behind the satellite relative to Earth (i.e. within the beamwidth of the groundstation antenna) for a short period each day. The Sun's immense power and broad radiation spectrum overload the Earth station's reception circuits with noise and, depending on antenna size and other factors, temporarily disrupt or degrade the circuit. The duration of those effects varies but can range from a few minutes to an hour. (For a given frequency band, a larger antenna has a narrower beamwidth, hence experiences shorter duration "Sun outage" windows).

• A modern folk-notion[clarification needed] claims that on the March equinox day (some may also include the September equinox day rather than leaving it out), one can balance an egg on its point.[6][7] However, one can balance an egg on its point any day of the year...if one has enough patience.[8]

• Although the word equinox is often understood to mean "equal [day and] night," as is noted elsewhere, this is not strictly true. For most locations on earth, there are two distinct identifiable days per year when the length of day and night are closest to being equal; those days are commonly referred to as the "equiluxes" to distinguish them from the equinoxes. Equinoxes are points in time, but equiluxes are days. By convention, equiluxes are the days where sunrise and sunset are closest to being exactly 12 hours apart. This way, you can refer to a single date as being the equilux, when in reality, it spans from sunset on one day to sunset the next, or sunrise on one to sunrise the next.

• What is true about the equinoxes is that two observers at the same distance north and south of the equator will experience nights of equal length.

• The equilux counts times when some direct sunlight could be visible, rather than all hours of usable daylight (which is any time when there is enough natural light to do outdoor activities without needing artificial light). This is due to twilight; a particular type of twilight which is officially defined as civil twilight. This amount of twilight can result in more than 12 hours of usable daylight up to a few weeks before the spring equinox, and up to a few weeks after the fall equinox.

• In a contrary vein, the daylight which is useful for illuminating houses and buildings during the daytime and is needed to produce the full psychological benefit of daylight, is shorter than the nominal time between sunrise and sunset. So in that sense, "useful" daylight is present for 12 hours only after the vernal equinox and before the autumnal equinox, because the intensity of light near sunrise and sunset, even with the sun slightly above the horizon, is considerably less than when the sun is high in the sky.

• It is perhaps valuable for people in the Americas and Asia to know that the equinoxes listed as occurring on March 21, which occurred frequently in the 20th century and which will occur occasionally in the 21st century, are presented as such using UTC, which is at least four hours in advance of any clock in the Americas and as much as twelve hours behind Asian clocks. Thus, there will be no spring equinox later than March 20 in the Americas in the coming century.

 

 

 

[tfarney]

"Tim - I'm a little disappointed by your tweako comment."

 

I used "tweako" for lack of a better term. What I'm talking about is discussion that often turns to the most esoteric (and often prohibitively expensive) things that often make the least difference in the listening experience. And I don't think it serves people who come here looking for advice. A great example, I think, is a currently active thread entitled "First Post! Cheapish DAC" in which a guy came in, admitting to not being an audiophile, looking for advice on a good-sounding, easily portable DAC in the $120 range. After a few posts, he was recommended a $200, non-portable, NOS Chinese DAC on ebay and the thread turned into a conversation about how that obscure DAC based on out-dated technology must be a real giant killer because it was recommended by a guy who makes a $3500 DAC that he claims is better than anything less than $35,000.

 

Not helpful, or logical. And I'm sure tweako was the wrong word. Not sure what the right one is....

 

Tim

 

[tino]

I too have presented facts only to have them rubbished, as I have mentioned previously.

 

I think this is a good forum. But people just need to accept that opinions will differ. And if they are going to present evidence / data / expert opinion to support their argument then they must accept these things when they come in the opposite direction. The MP3 debate is a great example, Tim / Ashley. Clearly the measurements are against compressed music, but in this case "you can't hear the difference" so the measurements are irrelevant. But, vinyl vs digital ?? The measurements support your view here, so the difference can clearly be heard this time. Funny that.

 

Obviously any manufacturer is going to try and sell their products. Us readers just have to keep this in mind.

 

No one is always going to be right. The very fact I'm on here is because I was proved wrong about computer audio in the first place - never thought it would match traditional hi-fi !!