Jump to content
IGNORED

MQA is Vaporware


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, John_Atkinson said:

Jim Austin would not know, but in the 33 years I was the magazine's editor, there were just two instances where after his review was published, a Stereophile writer received compensation after his review was published for sales resulting from the review. (A practice that I am sad to say is starting to happen with Internet reviews - Google Casper Mattresses, for example.) In both cases I immediately fired the writer.

I'm aware of the Casper debacle. Clearly, receiving compensation post publication is just as bad as having a prior agreement.

 

So twice you became aware of a writer receiving compensation for a good review. How many occurrences did you miss? There is no way you could possibly know.

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, mansr said:

I'm aware of the Casper debacle. Clearly, receiving compensation post publication is just as bad as having a prior agreement.

 

So twice you became aware of a writer receiving compensation for a good review. How many occurrences did you miss? There is no way you could possibly know.

 

There is no way any of us could possibly know if you, or Archimago or anyone posting here are receiving payment for attacking MQA. 

 

It is impossible to audit every bank account. But it is quite easy to get to know a writer and assess his (or, regrettably rarely, her) character and establish trust. That's something that isn't possible on the Internet, especially with respect to anonymous posters. 

 

Jim Austin, Editor

Stereophile

Link to comment
15 minutes ago, Jim Austin said:

That's something that isn't possible on the Internet, especially with respect to anonymous posters. 

 

That's an exceptionally broad, irresponsible, and concerning statement coming from someone in an editorial position anywhere. I'd contend it's actually disqualifying, and that if the intent of the publication was really to inform the public, a reasonable owner should give serious thought to firing you on the spot for it.

Link to comment
15 minutes ago, Jim Austin said:

 

There is no way any of us could possibly know if you, or Archimago or anyone posting here are receiving payment for attacking MQA. 

 

It is impossible to audit every bank account. But it is quite easy to get to know a writer and assess his (or, regrettably rarely, her) character and establish trust. That's something that isn't possible on the Internet, especially with respect to anonymous posters. 

 

Jim Austin, Editor

Stereophile

 

Cui Bono?

Boycott Warner

Boycott Tidal

Boycott Roon

Boycott Lenbrook

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

A manufacturer of D/A processors whose sales are suffering due to the lack of MQA decoding ability?

 

To be serious, I was recently told by a retailer that he is seeing MQA evolve from push marketing to pull marketing, ie, he now has would-be customers who ask if a DAC they are thinking of buying decodes MQA. In that environment, not having MQA puts a manufacturer at a competitive disadvantage regardless of the merits or lack thereof of the codec. 

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

 

Seriously?

Boycott Warner

Boycott Tidal

Boycott Roon

Boycott Lenbrook

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...