Stereophile Series on MQA Technology

[mansr]

13 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

It looks like MQA's Charm Offensive is trying to establish a beachhead at CA...

Let's see how long this one lasts. He doesn't seem quite as hot-tempered as Lavorgna though.

[seldomheard]

Stereophile's Editor has proven himself over and over again to be a total industry whore and slime bucket. This latest foray into pimping for MQA is a clear and convincing example. And it is this blatant shilling coupled with a total intolerance for any questioning/challenges that is at the heart of the demise of the "audiophile" industry here in the states. The morons and freaks at Stereophile have been puzzled for the past several years as to why attendance at shows has essentially dried up to the point that the "audio press" and exhibitor personnel numbers rival the number of attendees from the public. One of the primary reasons has to do with the fake shill crap they have been swimming in for the past 2 decades. Speaker cable  "suspenders"? Power conditioners? Seriously???  Ever corner a guy like Nelson Pass to ask why anyone would need a "power conditioner" to plug one of his $20,000 amps into? What's wrong Nelson? Your amp's built in power supply chain can't feed clean enough power to all stages? This latest "article" by Stereophile should seal the deal for anyone but the utterly clueless. And the rag should change its name to Snakeoil-o-file. The clueless moron who did the write up is so freakin stupid, he didn't know the pre and post ripple is SUPPOSED to be on the DAC output. If it's missing, it's not faithful to the original input signal! How utterly freakin' pathetic!!!

[firedog]

15 minutes ago, seldomheard said:

Stereophile's Editor has proven himself over and over again to be a total industry whore and slime bucket. This latest foray into pimping for MQA is a clear and convincing example. And it is this blatant shilling coupled with a total intolerance for any questioning/challenges that is at the heart of the demise of the "audiophile" industry here in the states. The morons and freaks at Stereophile have been puzzled for the past several years as to why attendance at shows has essentially dried up to the point that the "audio press" and exhibitor personnel numbers rival the number of attendees from the public. One of the primary reasons has to do with the fake shill crap they have been swimming in for the past 2 decades. Speaker cable  "suspenders"? Power conditioners? Seriously???  Ever corner a guy like Nelson Pass to ask why anyone would need a "power conditioner" to plug one of his $20,000 amps into? What's wrong Nelson? Your amp's built in power supply chain can't feed clean enough power to all stages? This latest "article" by Stereophile should seal the deal for anyone but the utterly clueless. And the rag should change its name to Snakeoil-o-file. The clueless moron who did the write up is so freakin stupid, he didn't know the pre and post ripple is SUPPOSED to be on the DAC output. If it's missing, it's not faithful to the original input signal! How utterly freakin' pathetic!!!

Another example of an overwrought response with unnecessarily aggressive and insulting language. An industry professional comes here and again gets nothing but insults, ad hominem attacks, etc. No wonder they don’t want to participate here.

BTW, the “clueless moron” has a PhD in physics; so he may have misunderstood some of what he is writing about, but he clearly isn’t a moron. 

Your position and argument would be much more effective if they stuck to the issues...but I guess that’s too much too expect in this day and age.

 

...Waiting now for the flaming, name calling response...

[NOMBEDES]

Well, I have @Seldomheard such a discouraging word.....(rim shot)

[seldomheard]

If you had experience as an industry professional who has had his technical comments deleted whenever they reveal impropriety at Stereophile,  you might feel differently. And the magazine published something in this case that could not have been peer reviewed by anyone with actual technical background in the subject matter. The MQA responses show an increase in the noise floor and latency in signal response versus the non MQA ouput. You have to be a moron to publish something so blatantly wrong - citing impulse response graphs and not knowing what they mean. Mr. Atkinson routinely deletes posts that are accurate and politely put forth evidence that makes him and his publication look bad. That's pretty slimey. It is what it is.

[wdw]

1 hour ago, John_Atkinson said:

I deleted a small number of posts by Brian and by another poster that did not conform to our rules. All of Brian Lucey's other comments are MQA are still there on the Stereophile website. Brian's original comments on MQA were not posted online until after the 2 articles in the January 2018 issue were at the printer. You should note that the online reprint of my essay on MQA does include links to some others who have criticized MQA

Not true.  - John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

John,

Glad to see you here but suspect it will only be short-lived as the shit storm of abuse is just queuing up.  Hold tight.

Best, 

Warren

[james45974]

1 hour ago, John_Atkinson said:

I deleted a small number of posts by Brian and by another poster that did not conform to our rules. All of Brian Lucey's other comments are MQA are still there on the Stereophile website. Brian's original comments on MQA were not posted online until after the 2 articles in the January 2018 issue were at the printer. You should note that the online reprint of my essay on MQA does include links to some others who have criticized MQA

Not true.  - John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

John, we are living in an era where increasingly perception becomes reality, just look at the state of politics these days!

 

The perception is that the old school paper press is in the pocket of MQA, and frankly you nor TAS have done nothing to disprove this.  And if MQA is as great as they say why do they have to continue with the hard sell these many years after it was introduced?  To me that says, as Shakespeare stated  "There is something rotten in Denmark."

[seldomheard]

One of my posts that pointed up an obvious error by a shill regarding sampes per second vs. samples per wavelength was altered by Atkinson this morning. The title said:

 

"It helps to proof read and think before you post"

 

That title was deleted as a "flame" by Atkinson.  Really? A flame?

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Hi @seldomheard, do you care to reveal your real name and credentials? 

[John_Atkinson]

1 minute ago, seldomheard said:

One of my posts that pointed up an obvious error by a shill regarding sampes per second vs. samples per wavelength was altered by Atkinson this morning. The title said:

 

"It helps to proof read and think before you post"

 

That title was deleted as a "flame" by Atkinson.  Really? A flame?

 

Yes, referring to another poster as a shill and suggesting he proofreads before he posts is indeed a flame. But your post is still there, of course.

 

BTW, the log shows that I deleted the heading of your post at 11:27am on Friday, not "this morning."

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

[seldomheard]

My boss would fire me. We have to sell product in this whore of a market. I just wish the market's press industry would look in the mirror on occasion to see it's role in the industry's demise more objectively. The industry is either merit based or it is not. We all have a choice. Either focus and contribute to an industry's fraudulent or merit based aspects. One path is short sighted and greedy. The other, while not as profitable, is more long term and sustainable.

[seldomheard]

Let me add "liar" to the charge, then. I never called anyone a shill in your magazine and you know it. The title I quoted above is exactly as it was rendered before you deleted it this morning. Thanks for weighing in, Mr. Liar in Chief...

[wdw]

29 minutes ago, seldomheard said:

Let me add "lier" to the charge, then. I never called anyone a shill in your magazine and you know it. The title I quoted above is exactly as it was rendered before you deleted it this morning. Thanks for weighing in, Mr. Lier in Chief...

could, at the very least when insulting someone on-line, spell it correctly!

 

(see you edited your posts to the correct spelling....just to keep the record straight)

[seldomheard]

I typed Liar and spell check underlined it. So I altered it until spellcheck  underline disappeared. I don't use the word very often in professional communication. Sadly, Mr. Atkinson's behavior has once again made its use inevitable.

[wdw]

1 minute ago, seldomheard said:

I typed Lyar and spell check underlined it. So I altered it until spellcheck  underline disappeared. I don't use the word very often in professional communication. Sadly, Mr. Atkinson's behavior has once again made its use inevitable.

 

Lier is defined as someone who rests or reclines. An example of a lier is a dog who is often sleepy. YourDictionary definition and usage example.

Lier dictionary definition | lier defined - YourDictionary

www.yourdictionary.com/lier

[seldomheard]

Any other distractions you'd like to redirect to?

[The Computer Audiophile]

34 minutes ago, seldomheard said:

My boss would fire me. We have to sell product in this whore of a market

This looks like an admission that you’re in the industry. If that’s the case you must identify your self in order to continue posting. 

[John_Atkinson]

6 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

This looks like an admission that you’re in the industry. If that’s the case you must identify your self in order to continue posting. 

 

We have the same rule on the Stereophile site. This is to prevent an employee of one company anonymously trashing products made by his competitors. Most people don't have a problem with this policy. For example, the late Charley Hansen of Ayre Acoustics posted many times on our site presenting his case against MQA, often in the strongest language. Charley's posts are still there.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

[seldomheard]

I'll answer that question with a better question. How many people who have accounts here on a percentage basis have listed their employer's id?

[seldomheard]

My comments stand on their own. They have no bearing whatsoever on any "competitor" - simply pointing out falsehoods in a "technical presentation" that only a technical person would know.

[NOMBEDES]

Wow. @seldomheard is certainly tossing the sabot in the loom here.  So much for the holiday season.

 

Without the fear and loathing, let me reduce his comments regarding the whore industry to warm milk:

 

1. Cables do make a difference.  But not the difference that most audio-heads think.  There is no way a cable generally improves sound.  Higher end cables have become the new equalizer.  (think about it.  if it requires $120. to build an equalizer which you can sell for $999. that is not a bad profit, but if you can build an exotic cable for $120. and sell it for $999. a foot! well... you are Nordost ... ha!) Cables/Eaualizers operate on the listener.  If the listener thinks he hears an improvement so much the better.

 

2.  Power management:  Again, if you can hear a difference, so much the better.  If you can hear a $5 or $6K difference, even better.  I agree with @seldomheard that Mr. Pass can certainly build an amplifier and has mastered the power supply question.

 

3.  Cable Elevators:  These are the most important audio product ever.  Now you can dust under your cable run and increase your   WAF by a factor of .3%   (this measurement was approved by Stereophile)

 

4.  Amplifiers:  Most modern amplifiers sound the same.  If you want to listen to differences, get new speakers.

 

5,  MQA: I doubt that the average audiophile, much less the average consumer, is going to go out and buy any MQA product because he just has to have it.   Just like a nice flat screen TV.  MQA will be another icon on the box.   Most people will not even use it if they have it.  I mean, do most people know their TV refresh rate?

 

Now I want everyone to have a wonderful holiday season, even you seldomheard.

[seldomheard]

6 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

We have the same rule on the Stereophile site. This is to prevent an employee of one company anonymously trashing products made by his competitors. Most people don't have a problem with this policy. For example, the late Charley Hansen of Ayre Acoustics posted many times on our site presenting his case against MQA, often in the strongest language. Charley's posts are still there.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

Yes. This policy has worked very well for you in the past to censor anyone with a technical background that posts something on your site that you don't want your readers to see.

[The Computer Audiophile]

18 minutes ago, seldomheard said:

I'll answer that question with a better question. How many people who have accounts here on a percentage basis have listed their employer's id?

 

15 minutes ago, seldomheard said:

My comments stand on their own. They have no bearing whatsoever on any "competitor" - simply pointing out falsehoods in a "technical presentation" that only a technical person would know.

 

False equivalency. 

 

Our rule stands. Identify yourself, if you’re in the industry, or you’re gone. 

[seldomheard]

I'm retired and if I revealed who I worked for in the past or who I might consult for in the future, I would not be hired again. I have had several "bosses" in the industry and do not speak for them or their companies.

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, seldomheard said:

I'm retired and if I revealed who I worked for in the past or who I might consult for in the future, I would not be hired again. I have had several "bosses" in the industry and do not speak for them or their companies.

Ok. Your account is now banned.