The fact that Atkinson showed up here

[plissken]

8 hours ago, wdw said:

See above....plissken and his little buddy. 

 

That is the icon for saying thanks. Just in case you didn't know (a high probability event for you). 

[Samuel T Cogley]

52 minutes ago, Sal1950 said:

Just as a good portion of your writers are portraying vinyl as the top tier for obtaining high fidelity reproduction in this year of Our Lord 2018, flip thru the pages of Stereophile to see how much advertising money is now being made from the vinyl industry as the outcome of your magazines promotion of vinyl as SOTA.

 

+1

 

Digitally sourced vinyl is one of the biggest, it not the biggest scam in audiophilia today.

[rando]

I somewhat long for the days when one had to search out a press and stand on the corner facing prosecution for distributing one's nutty inner thoughts at length.  Added bonus, no matter what was printed on it the paper ream it spooled off was never too glossy to wipe your ass when you were done.  

[Rt66indierock]

6 minutes ago, rando said:

I somewhat long for the days when one had to search out a press and stand on the corner facing prosecution for distributing one's nutty inner thoughts at length.  Added bonus, no matter what was printed on it the paper ream it spooled off was never too glossy to wipe your ass when you were done.  

 

And "I read no law abridging to mean no law abridging." Hugo Black, Smith v. California Concurring opinion 361 U.S. 147 (1959) 

[Shadders]

15 minutes ago, rando said:

I somewhat long for the days when one had to search out a press and stand on the corner facing prosecution for distributing one's nutty inner thoughts at length.  Added bonus, no matter what was printed on it the paper ream it spooled off was never too glossy to wipe your ass when you were done.  

Hi,

I worked for a "company" who had toilet paper like tracing paper. At the top of the square it said "Property of the XXXXXX" and at the bottom of the square it said "Now wash your hands".

It was not until the mid 90's before they moved to soft paper with no messaging.

Regards,

Shadders.

[tmtomh]

2 hours ago, Sal1950 said:

Please John, Don't play us for blind fools. MQA is a potential money maker for most everyone in the industry from the source material suppliers to the hardware manufacturers. Everyone making more money means more potential income for Stereophile.  Just as a good portion of your writers are portraying vinyl as the top tier for obtaining high fidelity reproduction in this year of Our Lord 2018, flip thru the pages of Stereophile to see how much advertising money is now being made from the vinyl industry as the outcome of your magazines promotion of vinyl as SOTA.

 

As to your remarks about Peter, I won't debate only to say IMHO. the goings on at The Critic were a shining light of integrity compared to Stereophile's track record. YMMV

 

I'm a digital-disc and digital-file listener myself, not a vinyl advocate. But come on - Stereophile is promoting vinyl because it jacks up their ad revenue? There is no real evidence for that - which is something that should matter to members of this forum, of all people.

 

People argue about the benefits and demerits of vinyl, and there is good and bad faith on both sides of the argument. The fact that you (and I) might come down on one side of that debate, and the fact that we might think some folks' arguments in favor of vinyl are terrible arguments, is not the same thing as those folks knowingly spouting BS for personal financial interest. And you know it.

 

Even Michael Fremer - who I can't stand and who I think is a horrid dilettante - admits freely that vinyl sounds different/"special" because of euphonics (aka inaccuracies) produced in the analogue cutting and playback chain. He's openly said more than once that he doesn't care why vinyl sounds better (to him) or whether or not it's more accurate - he just likes it better and insists it's more involving than digital. Again, I do not agree with him, and in fact I don't even particularly like him (based on his public persona - could be a great guy in real life for all I know). 

 

This is all such a waste of time and energy, because the conspiracy argument is not necessary in order to make the real argument here: That Stereophile has been cheerleading for MQA without sufficiently doing critical analysis of whether or not MQA's claims are true. To my eyes it's beyond dispute that Stereophile has been treating MQA as an exciting new audiophile format. That's not necessarily a problem per se - for example, they did the same thing with SACD. The problem is that it's become clear that unlike DSD, MQA's sonic value is at best questionable, and the format comes with a ton of baggage that needs to be more widely reported, understood, and critically examined - and Stereophile and much of the rest of the established audiophile press doesn't seem to be doing that.

[Shadders]

20 minutes ago, tmtomh said:

 

What is it with you all? I'm a digital-disc and digital-file listener myself, not a vinyl advocate. But come on - Stereophile is promoting vinyl because it jacks up their ad revenue? People of good faith argue about the benefits and demerits of vinyl. The fact that you (and I) might come down on one side of that debate, and the fact that we might think some folks' arguments in favor of vinyl are terrible arguments, is not the same thing as those folks knowingly spouting BS for personal financial interest. And you know it.

 

Even Michael Fremer - who I can't stand and who I think is a horrid dilettante - admits freely that vinyl sounds different/"special" because of euphonics (aka inaccuracies) produced in the analogue cutting and playback chain. He's openly said more than once that he doesn't care why vinyl sounds better (to him) or whether or not it's more accurate - he just likes it better and insists it's more involving than digital. Again, I do not agree with him, and in fact I don't even particularly like him (based on his public persona - could be a great guy in real life for all I know). 

 

I find it highly ironic that a group of folks so dedicated to evidence-based analysis is making accusations of money-driven conspiracy with zero hard evidence. And as I noted in a prior comment, it's such a waste of time and energy, because this conspiracy is not necessary in order to make the real argument here: That Stereophile has been cheerleading for MQA without sufficiently doing critical analysis of whether or not MQA's claims are true.

Hi,

I do not read Stereophile or the online aspects, unless i am looking for a technical analysis of an amplifier, for instance.

 

If Stereophile is always positive about anything new or trending, then with regards to MQA, there is no change.

 

The problem i suppose is that John Atkinson has stated much of the criticisms on this forum are rejected - i asked which ones are accepted, no reply on this forum, he stated read the articles.

 

The criticisms on this site are actually not criticisms, they are facts showing the falsehoods by MQA. To me, this is where the problem resides, the journalistic press are not covering MQA with an unbiased approach, and people on here are not happy about it.

 

Regards,

Shadders.

[rando]

39 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

And "I read no law abridging to mean no law abridging." Hugo Black, Smith v. California Concurring opinion 361 U.S. 147 (1959) 

 

Prosecution does not involve the courts.  A criminal prosecution or civil suit are two procedures involving the courts.  At this moment I'm not aware of any filings, briefs, or adjudication of a legal body resulting from this ongoing prosecution: The people of Computer Audiophile v. J.A. (Stereophile print and online magazine).  

 

37 minutes ago, Shadders said:

Hi,

I worked for a "company" who had toilet paper like tracing paper. At the top of the square it said "Property of the XXXXXX" and at the bottom of the square it said "Now wash your hands".

It was not until the mid 90's before they moved to soft paper with no messaging.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

"Too glossy to even be usable as T.P." is a very old insult lobbed against the purveyors of "pulp" publications.  It was intended to be very tongue in cheek and humorous.  As was what preceded it.  Somehow your example was more fitting.

[tmtomh]

4 minutes ago, Shadders said:

Hi,

I do not read Stereophile or the online aspects, unless i am looking for a technical analysis of an amplifier, for instance.

 

If Stereophile is always positive about anything new or trending, then with regards to MQA, there is no change.

 

The problem i suppose is that John Atkinson has stated the criticisms on this forum are all rejected - i asked which ones are accepted, no reply on this forum, he stated read the articles.

 

The criticisms on this site are actually not criticisms, they are facts showing the falsehoods by MQA. To me, this is where the problem resides, the journalistic press are not covering MQA with an unbiased approach, and people on here are not happy about it.

 

Regards,

Shadders.

 

I agree with you 100% that that press are not covering MQA in a complete or full/unbiased way. 

 

If we are going to talk about facts versus falsehoods, though, then you have to avoid being a hypocrite about that. "I asked [JA] which [criticisms] are accepted, no reply on this forum, he stated read the articles" is not the same thing as "John Atkinson has stated the criticisms on this forum are all rejected." The equation you're attempting to make simply is not true.

[Shadders]

2 minutes ago, tmtomh said:

 

I agree with you 100% that that press are not covering MQA in a complete or full/unbiased way. 

 

If we are going to talk about facts versus falsehoods, though, then you have to avoid being a hypocrite about that. "I asked [JA] which [criticisms] are accepted, no reply on this forum, he stated read the articles" is not the same thing as "John Atkinson has stated the criticisms on this forum are all rejected." The equation you're attempting to make simply is not true.

Hi,

Agreed - i reread - he stated much of the criticisms.

I will amend my post.

Regards,

Shadders.

[realhifi]

54 minutes ago, rando said:

 

Prosecution does not involve the courts.  A criminal prosecution or civil suit are two procedures involving the courts.  At this moment I'm not aware of any filings, briefs, or adjudication of a legal body resulting from this ongoing prosecution: The people of Computer Audiophile v. J.A. (Stereophile print and online magazine).  

 

 

Careful with grouping “The people of Computer Audiophile” into one anti Stereophile crowd. I’m betting if you took a poll (that’s IF ALL readers were to participate) you’d find that it’s a minority that has any axe to grind with either JA or Stereophile. Actually it’s most likely that it’s a VERY small minority. Even if the comment was offhand and a joke I’m betting Chris would NOT like seeing that either. I can’t imagine he wants to endorse a witchunt against prominent publications (Stereophile or Absolute Sound) and risk his and his sites reputation over this MQA business. 

[firedog]

13 hours ago, esldude said:

If you don't like the challenges, then step up and shut him up.  Otherwise looks like the challenges can't be met.

No, it just means they don't interest anyone enough to waste their time on them.

[crenca]

26 minutes ago, realhifi said:

 

Careful with grouping “The people of Computer Audiophile” into one anti Stereophile crowd. I’m betting if you took a poll (that’s IF ALL readers were to participate) you’d find that it’s a minority that has any axe to grind with either JA or Stereophile. Actually it’s most likely that it’s a VERY small minority. Even if the comment was offhand and a joke I’m betting Chris would NOT like seeing that either. I can’t imagine he wants to endorse a witchunt against prominent publications (Stereophile or Absolute Sound) and risk his and his sites reputation over this MQA business. 

 

Puuuleeeese, as he has explicitly acknowledged he hosts the "largest anti-MQA site" - you don't think he does this intentionally?  Selfishly, he gets the clicks, altruistically, he furthers the "progress" of Audiophiledom.  This is often opposed to Stereophile, TAS, and the rest of the status quo gatekeepers.

 

As far as you and @wdw and all the others who are anxious over the status quo and "chasing off industry representatives", I say welcome to the future where the confidence game is actually seen for what it is (by some of us).  JA is a big boy, he can take a little (actually a lot) of critical questioning and even a hanful of internet blow hards (that would be you and me  ).  In fact he came here, said just a little, and dropped teasers for future articles.  He is laughing at your anxiety all the way to the bank...

[christopher3393]

Recommended soundtrack for thread:

 

 

 

https://www.gramophone.co.uk/review/penderecki-die-teufel-von-loudun

[Samuel T Cogley]

5 minutes ago, christopher3393 said:

Recommended soundtrack for thread:

 

 

So Atkinson is Father Grandier?  Really?         Then who is Cardinal Richelieu?  Your attempt at highbrow falls a little flat for me.  Perhaps I'm missing the point.

 

 

[Rt66indierock]

1 hour ago, realhifi said:

 

Careful with grouping “The people of Computer Audiophile” into one anti Stereophile crowd. I’m betting if you took a poll (that’s IF ALL readers were to participate) you’d find that it’s a minority that has any axe to grind with either JA or Stereophile. Actually it’s most likely that it’s a VERY small minority. Even if the comment was offhand and a joke I’m betting Chris would NOT like seeing that either. I can’t imagine he wants to endorse a witchunt against prominent publications (Stereophile or Absolute Sound) and risk his and his sites reputation over this MQA business. 

 

Sorry but that ship sailed in 2016. His site and his reputation have benefited from the criticism of MQA. Watch some of the videos of the 2017 RMAF seminars. Imagine the people in the industry who call and email to complain.

 

 

[esldude]

2 hours ago, firedog said:

No, it just means they don't interest anyone enough to waste their time on them.

I don't think that passes muster with those complaining about the challenges.  The offer to compensate is so it isn't a waste of time.

[realhifi]

2 hours ago, crenca said:

 

Puuuleeeese, as he has explicitly acknowledged he hosts the "largest anti-MQA site" - you don't think he does this intentionally?  Selfishly, he gets the clicks, altruistically, he furthers the "progress" of Audiophiledom.  This is often opposed to Stereophile, TAS, and the rest of the status quo gatekeepers.

 

As far as you and @wdw and all the others who are anxious over the status quo and "chasing off industry representatives", I say welcome to the future where the confidence game is actually seen for what it is (by some of us).  JA is a big boy, he can take a little (actually a lot) of critical questioning and even a hanful of internet blow hards (that would be you and me  ).  In fact he came here, said just a little, and dropped teasers for future articles.  He is laughing at your anxiety all the way to the bank...

 

Do I seem anxious?  I happen to think JA can more than handle himself here or any other little chat room that might pop up on the web.

I'm not concerned at all about chasing any industry folks off as most just wouldn't bother to begin with.  As I posted earlier, I'm surprised JA even bothered to show up here but I'm sure you're right in that he delights in some banter with such "experts".

 

As far as Chris's altruism.....really? 

[Albrecht]

On 12/31/2017 at 6:34 PM, JSeymour said:

 

He could test the viscosity of various tomato soups: which would have the same relevancy.

[Ralf11]

6 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

+1

 

Digitally sourced vinyl is one of the biggest, it not the biggest scam in audiophilia today.

 

not if you find Snap, Crackle & Pop euphonic

 

or just fun cartoon characters

[rando]

4 hours ago, realhifi said:

 

Careful with grouping “The people of Computer Audiophile” into one anti Stereophile crowd. I’m betting if you took a poll (that’s IF ALL readers were to participate) you’d find that it’s a minority that has any axe to grind with either JA or Stereophile. Actually it’s most likely that it’s a VERY small minority. Even if the comment was offhand and a joke I’m betting Chris would NOT like seeing that either. I can’t imagine he wants to endorse a witchunt against prominent publications (Stereophile or Absolute Sound) and risk his and his sites reputation over this MQA business. 

 

Chris is welcome to edit my posts and discredit my jokes as he sees fit.  Gauging by your reaction I may have gone a bit close to the skin.  Please take another look at the offending statement's context before deciding it wasn't making a fair amount of the above at the same level that it spoke to you on.  

[realhifi]

4 minutes ago, rando said:

 

Chris is welcome to edit my posts and discredit my jokes as he sees fit.  Gauging by your reaction I may have gone a bit close to the skin.  Please take another look at the offending statement's context before deciding it wasn't making a fair amount of the point you stated above at the same level that it spoke to you on.  

? yep, you’re right, just a wee bit jumpy I guess. No harm no foul?

[rando]

No worries.  I really didn't need to insert myself here to start with.  

 

Now back to slowly deciding how best to string up the middleman.  Who is planning to capitalize on the sensation being instigated by his expressed viewpoints in contrast to popular sentiment.  

[esldude]

8 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

+1

 

Digitally sourced vinyl is one of the biggest, it not the biggest scam in audiophilia today.

Maybe we could start a business to digitally record at 24/384 vinyl which was digitally sourced.  That way it would have the goodness of its pass thru the LP/analog world, and be hirez  excuse me HiRez***********

 

And this would be an even bigger scam.  

[Sal1950]

5 minutes ago, esldude said:

And this would be an even bigger scam

And one that could probably make a lot of money.

Lets talk dude.