MQA is Vaporware

[plissken]

I do not have time as I have an appointment to get to. I'd recommend searching for "Ethernet" on AudioStream.

 

One thing to note -- "cables" do not have a "sound". Systems do.

 

The closest titled article I could find was "Ethernet Noise: Proof Of Concept" but it just seemed like product placement for an EMI/RFI filter for industrial environments.

 

Then there was the ArsTechnica article of yours that led me to the measurements were the Vodka was borderline in spec vs a cable that cost about 24 times less.

 

You asked for items of substance so I would appreciate engagement that is proportional to your own request.

[christopher3393]

Ethernet cables are off topic here. I would suggest another thread for that, please. There's enough to deal with in the Linn post, as well as other MQA concerns, imo.

[plissken]

Here's a question for you - how many people have I banned from AudioStream?

 

Archimago

Jinjuku

Peter Wright (ArsTechnica)

 

I'll try to remember some others.

[christopher3393]

nevermind. wish this could stay on topic.

[Samuel T Cogley]

I do not have time...

 

Who didn't see that coming?

[Samuel T Cogley]

nevermind. wish this could stay on topic.

 

Since the topic of this thread is a discussion/debate on whether MQA is "vaporware", the actions of de facto marketing agents is actually on topic.

[plissken]

nevermind. wish this could stay on topic.

 

I encourage Mr. Lavorgna to participate in this thread: Audiophile Ethernet

 

But realistically there isn't going to be a well thought out counterpoint coming on any of this (MQA, Ethernet, or otherwise) from him so the fears of this thread really going off on a tangent due to participation by him are slim to none IMO. My observation is he as an inability to actually hold an above board conversation.

[christopher3393]

Since the topic of this thread is a discussion/debate on whether MQA is "vaporware", the actions of de facto marketing agents is actually on topic.

 

I stand corrected. But I do think the exchanges with Michael Lavorgna were unhelpful in the nasty tone that was taken. Some of the criticisms were put very bluntly and I think excessively. It became pretty uncivil in my opinion. In the form it was taking it wasn't going anywhere but down the drain.

[christopher3393]

I encourage Mr. Lavorgna to participate in this thread: Audiophile Ethernet

 

But realistically there isn't going to be a well thought out counterpoint coming on any of this (MQA, Ethernet, or otherwise) from him so the fears of this thread really going off on a tangent due to participation by him are slim to none IMO. My observation is he as an inability to actually hold an above board conversation.

 

Point taken. Not sure I agree entirely. I think your posts can come off as pretty confrontational and aggressive at times , as well as several others who posted here. All good contributors, but it was clear to me this was driven by some animus and there seems to be the desire to give Michael a beat down. He's perfectly able to stand up for himself, but I just didn't think this was going to go anywhere because of all involved, not just Michael.

 

I may be wrong.

[plissken]

Point taken. Not sure I agree entirely. I think your posts can come off as pretty confrontational and aggressive at times , as well as several others who posted here. All good contributors, but it was clear to me this was driven by some animus and there seems to be the desire to give Michael a beat down. He's perfectly able to stand up for himself, but I just didn't think this was going to go anywhere because of all involved, not just Michael.

 

I may be wrong.

 

It is my style on subjects were I'm a material expert. Networking both from installing the physical infrastructure to routing to server architecture (mainly HA clusters and virtualization).

 

I try to be helpful where I can. But something you need to understand: Many here have formed an opinion about Michael over the years of what we believe is tantamount to a hyperbole machine. It has it's roots in him banning and deleting accounts/posts that effectively challenge his assumptions and factually expose them to their shortcomings.

 

I mean he banned Archimago for petes sake and I've never read a cross word from the man.

 

It's why there isn't any worry about him actively engaging in a thought provoking manner here. He's a person of little actual substance and his posting here has already amply displayed that fact.

 

So far he's the only poster in this to call another forum member an ass.

 

Now I think he's a hack, but that's a position I can actually back up.

[plissken]

Oh another person that Lavorgna banned: John Sully.

 

John is the person that challenged Lavorgna/Swenson/Gordon on their perceptions of how bit perfect audio players worked in regards to how Intel handles caching at the hardware layer:

 

Listening to Ethernet ($10,000 Ethernet Cables!!) | AudioStream

 

Q&A with John Swenson. Part 3: How bit-perfect software can affect sound | AudioStream.

 

Sound Science | AudioStream

 

John Sully is low level application engineer and wrote directly for Intel architectures while @ Silicon Graphics. He goes into great detail about how on die cache works and why L/S/G having a misunderstanding that they did.

[MikeJazz]

There were a number of additional posts by the same user that promoted Linn. When viewed on whole, it was clear that the intention was to posit Linn against MQA. It is also the case that this user is not associated with Linn professionally but some posts were misleadingly 'signed' by a Linn employee.

 

Why not edit and correct the posts and allowing the discussion to be carried on?

[Rt66indierock]

I should point out that I didn't actually post the—now deleted—comment over on Audiostream, another user has pasted it from my original post made over on the Linn forums.

 

The guy seemed to have posted it multiple times so perhaps it may have looked like spam.

 

Jim Collinson

 

Jim,

 

Welcome to Computer Audiophile and the thread I started January 2, 2017. As a Linn employee you have a different viewpoint than I do and I welcome your comments on the original post.

[Samuel T Cogley]

Point taken. Not sure I agree entirely. I think your posts can come off as pretty confrontational and aggressive at times , as well as several others who posted here. All good contributors, but it was clear to me this was driven by some animus and there seems to be the desire to give Michael a beat down. He's perfectly able to stand up for himself, but I just didn't think this was going to go anywhere because of all involved, not just Michael.

 

I may be wrong.

 

I'm not sure I completely disagree with your view here. This "desire" you observe is simply a reaction to the heavy handedness that elite audio reviewers enjoy in their protected spaces. IMHO, Mr. Lavorgna has not earned the respect that he believes he deserves. I guess what I'm saying is that I don't dispute some level of animus, but I wholeheartedly believe it is deserved. YMMV of course.

[audiventory]

A firmware update won't rewire the analogue parts of a DAC.

 

Analog filter there will do not updated

[Vincent1234]

Can you provide some links please? Do you have anything about what you think is happening and can you bridge conjecture and assumption to actual measurements?

 

I know Archimago tested some Ethernet cables and couldn't find any differences. But then again you banned him too.

Sorry plissken, but are you really suggesting here there are no audible differences in different qualities of Ethernet cables? If so, I sincerely doubt your hearing capabilities.. I've heard several comparisons and the differences in SQ are very obvious. I frankly don't care if they are measurable or not. But OK, we're off topic now.

 

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Computer Audiophile mobile app

[Vincent1234]

Point taken. Not sure I agree entirely. I think your posts can come off as pretty confrontational and aggressive at times , as well as several others who posted here. All good contributors, but it was clear to me this was driven by some animus and there seems to be the desire to give Michael a beat down. He's perfectly able to stand up for himself, but I just didn't think this was going to go anywhere because of all involved, not just Michael.

 

I may be wrong.

You were not wrong. The tone was ridiculous.

 

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Computer Audiophile mobile app

[Maldur]

from my original post made over on the Linn forums.

Hi Jim, this is very worth reading, thank You.

[Vincent1234]

Jim,

 

Welcome to Computer Audiophile and the thread I started January 2, 2017. As a Linn employee you have a different viewpoint than I do and I welcome your comments on the original post.

Now, thát's the proper tone to welcome new members!

 

Why was Michael not being welcomed in a normal way? Unless of course no one is really interested in his opinion because it might differ from yours..? Such a missed chance for an open discussion.. :-((

 

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Computer Audiophile mobile app

[crenca]

Here's another helpful tip for you - if you continue to act like an ass, I will most certainly ignore you. Capiche? You see, I don't mind having a conversation but I do mind bullshit.

 

Oops, he is a "Cardiac Electrophysiologist" and not a more general "radiologist" - of course in this discussion it is a distinction without a difference.

 

Late to the party, but Michael by his very presence here has of course confirmed what we already knew - that he has an impulse to "go personal" (as in the above quote) instead of addressing the topic when people disagree with him and facts do not fit the story he is telling.

 

Michael, really, you should stick to reviewing and allow someone else to do the blogging, "editing", and response/banning (which are actually rarely needed) - your site would greatly benefit - its just not your strong suit (and that is an understatement ).

 

As to your response to Linn and Jim, I would say it is "adolescent" but that would be giving it too much credit.

 

As for MQA, well, you (and Stereophile) have really truly dropped the ball on this one from a consumer point of view. If you guys don't have the resources in house to make a good judgement - reach out. And for goodness sake, keep reading this blog and others - you will learn a few things...

[plissken]

Sorry plissken, but are you really suggesting here there are no audible differences in different qualities of Ethernet cables? If so, I sincerely doubt your hearing capabilities.. I've heard several comparisons and the differences in SQ are very obvious. I frankly don't care if they are measurable or not. But OK, we're off topic now.

 

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Computer Audiophile mobile app

 

I've got $$ that says you can't. My test setup is a Server, Cisco Switch, Client computer with two NIC's teamed. One AQ Vodka cable that and a BJC cable.

 

This would be single blind. You get $2000 for hitting 14/15 swaps of the cable.

 

Client computer using JRiver.

 

This can all happen in real time with zero interruption in the playback.

[Vincent1234]

I'm not sure I completely disagree with your view here. This "desire" you observe is simply a reaction to the heavy handedness that elite audio reviewers enjoy in their protected spaces. IMHO, Mr. Lavorgna has not earned the respect that he believes he deserves. I guess what I'm saying is that I don't dispute some level of animus, but I wholeheartedly believe it is deserved. YMMV of course.

Doesn't help the dialogue at all.. I'm so disappointed to miss this chance to finally have a fair discussion with him, based on clear factual questions instead of a bunch of assumptions. I would be pissed-off too. Hope he will come back and if so, please be more open-minded and less judging than you were just now. Thank you!

 

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Computer Audiophile mobile app

[plissken]

Doesn't help the dialogue at all.. I'm so disappointed to miss this chance to finally have a fair discussion with him, based on clear factual questions instead of a bunch of assumptions. I would be pissed-off too. Hope he will come back and if so, please be more open-minded and less judging than you were now. Thank you.

 

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Computer Audiophile mobile app

 

He's not coming back though. You are missing the entire point: If Michael can not edit, delete, or ban the user he will not engage in a conversation. It's not in his DNA to have a level playing field in this regard.

 

You'd have a better chance at winning the lottery. Look at the links I provided. Ctrl+F in your browser and search for 'Sully'. You find a single post of his that merits banning. You won't find one. He's banned because he was making a better technical point than Michael and you can not have that @ Audiostream.

[Vincent1234]

I've got $$ that says you can't. My test setup is a Server, Cisco Switch, Client computer with two NIC's teamed. One AQ Vodka cable that and a BJC cable.

 

This would be single blind. You get $2000 for hitting 14/15 swaps of the cable.

 

Client computer using JRiver.

 

This can all happen in real time with zero interruption in the playback.

Not interested, thanks. I hear what I hear and that's enough for me.

 

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Computer Audiophile mobile app

[plissken]

Not interested, thanks. I hear what I hear and that's enough for me.

 

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Computer Audiophile mobile app

 

LOL. Hahahahaha. I've never seen a sure $2K just turned down like that. I rest my case.