The Brinkman Ship MQA Listening Results

[Samuel T Cogley]

10 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

 Could you please provide a link to something I have written where I refer to Computer Audiophile as a "den of deplorables."

 

You have not written those precise words that I'm aware of.  But I've certainly gotten the unmistakable impression that you have an opinion that's something very close to that.  If you disagree, here's your opportunity to express how you feel about this forum.

 

How do you characterize CA when you discuss it with other luminaries of audiophilia?  I can't imagine it's positive.

[mansr]

5 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

Could you please provide a link to something I have written where I refer to Computer Audiophile as a "den of deplorables."

You haven't. Michael Lavorgna has, repeatedly, though perhaps not in those exact words.

[HalSF]

27 minutes ago, mansr said:

Do you not agree that such an outcome is every label executive's wet dream?

I don’t think that MQA and what passes for label executives these days have the competence to take over the audio world.

 

When Spotify, Apple, and more than a smattering of DAC makers embrace MQA, and it starts to become a default standard you can’t opt out of, then I’ll join the barricades too. But so far I think MQA is a losing proposition, all in all.

[mansr]

1 minute ago, HalSF said:

When Spotify, Apple, and more than a smattering of DAC makers embrace MQA, and it starts to become a default standard you can’t opt out of, then I’ll join the barricades too.

By then it will be too late.

[Samuel T Cogley]

1 minute ago, HalSF said:

I don’t think that MQA and what passes for label executives these days have the competence to take over the audio world.

 

When Spotify, Apple, and more than a smattering of DAC makers embrace MQA, and it starts to become a default standard you can’t opt out of, then I’ll join the barricades too. But so I think MQA is a losing proposition, all in all.

 

Apple is the big one there.  No MQA in the HomePod

[John_Atkinson]

21 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

26 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

 Could you please provide a link to something I have written where I refer to Computer Audiophile as a "den of deplorables."

 

You have not written those precise words that I'm aware of. 

 

In which case, why did you say I did? And in response to your subsequent question, I haven't discussed CA with "other luminaries of audiophilia," other than the recent case of my conversation with Chris Connacker about the Russian origin of the "GFYM" statement.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

[phosphorein]

6 hours ago, manisandher said:

OK, I have better things to do than take BS to task over this. But there's one thing that's just occurred to me...

 

...

 

If I stream redbook files from Tidal, they sound different to exactly the same files sitting locally on my NAS. This is true irrespective of the software player I use. I'd describe the streamed files as indeed having a 'digital sheen' to them. Perhaps what BS and his host were hearing was down to streaming vs. playing locally?

 

(I suspect some here will think what I've just described cannot possibly be the case. Alas, it's what I'm hearing.)

 

Mani.

 

Absolutely the same observation here...

[crenca]

1 hour ago, John_Atkinson said:

 Could you please provide a link to something I have written where I refer to Computer Audiophile as a "den of deplorables."

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

 

I am not aware of any such language by you, but you are the editor of those who do use such language.  John Austin led off his recent series with his "nasty" characterization of the forums.  TAS however is the greater offender, reaching for a "political" understanding of why consumers would reject MQA, calling it "bizarre".  All this is revealtory, for it reveals the distance between the trade publications and consumer.

 

However, even HalSF who is allegedly just another audiophile says "...extraordinary hostility and paranoia directed at MQA" which just shows how homogenous and "locked in" this culture is.  Such audiophiles are so acclimated with the extraordinary language used to promote this or that (such as your "birth of a new world", "elegant" "extraordinary", etc.) that when certain others oppose it with the proportional counter of "fraud", "empty", "money grab" (or as I call Bob S, a "Big Fat Liar"), well then it is not very nice and HalSF and others start to wag their fingers.  

 

All this reveals a shift in culture in my opinion.  Here in the USA, we have a President who does not play by the "Presidential" rules, the "dignity of the office" and all that.  The very ones screaming at him (from both the left and the right) are the same ones who have for years broken and manipulated these very same rules for their own ends.  You don't have to like Trump to appreciate that he beats the media at their own game.

 

All this to say that the civility complaint mostly falls flat for me.  Sure, in a "free speech zone" there is always going to be speech off topic, ridiculous, rude, etc.  So what?  Far more important is the fact that a large and important signal is getting through whereas before it was not...
 

[HalSF]

It’s wonderfully weird to me, HalSF — who is not simply allegedly just another audiophile, but a person who has never written one single kind word about MQA and who has written a bunch of words criticizing it — to discover that I’m part of some homogeneous and “locked in” culture of MQA enablers. All for saying let’s not be assholes.

[Brinkman Ship]

6 minutes ago, HalSF said:

It’s wonderfully weird to me, HalSF — who is not simply allegedly just another audiophile, but a person who has never written one single kind word about MQA and who has written a bunch of words criticizing it — to discover that I’m part of some homogeneous and “locked in” culture of MQA enablers. All for saying let’s not be assholes.

For the record: I have never said you were an MQA Enabler, nor do I actually think you are one.

 

Let me make that crystal.

 

Just on a high horse.  Save your lectures. Look at the bigger picture.

[Samuel T Cogley]

1 hour ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

In which case, why did you say I did? And in response to your subsequent question, I haven't discussed CA with "other luminaries of audiophilia," other than the recent case of my conversation with Chris Connacker about the Russian origin of the "GFYM" statement.

 

With due respect, you're being disingenuous.  I asked what your opinion is of CA and you're avoiding the question.  Could it be that if you answered honestly, my original characterization of your sentiments will turn out to be correct and you're trying to cling to your token victory of me agreeing that you didn't actually write the words?  Or are you being careful of what you write on advice of counsel?

[knickerhawk]

Question: What is the ethical standing of a poster in the MQA-related discussions here who first presents him or herself as objective, neutral or otherwise open to the arguments of both sides but who, in fact, is already decided and conceals a deeply partisan position? Should that person be ashamed of him/herself? Should that person be roundly condemned and then ignored, regardless of whether his position is aligned with one's own?

[Brinkman Ship]

are you referring to John Darko or Jim Austin?

[knickerhawk]

15 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

are you referring to John Darko or Jim Austin?

 

Is the identity of the person in any way relevant to the appropriate answer? My personal answer is "No." What is your personal answer to the question?

[crenca]

1 hour ago, HalSF said:

...All for saying let’s not be assholes.

 

Why do you think you need to finger wag, or why would you think you have some kind of moral high ground from which to finger wag no matter what your position on MQA is?

 

As far as I can tell, you are simply privileging style over substance - a kind of "let's all put our jacket and tie on and be good upstanding Audiophiles".  You are saying "Sure, MQA is a fraud and Bob S and all his sycophants are Big Fat Liars, but we need to have a dignified response".  I call bullshit on that, and on your hypocrisy...

[Brinkman Ship]

5 minutes ago, crenca said:

 

Why do you think you need to finger wag, or why would you think you have some kind of moral high ground from which to finger wag no matter what your position on MQA is?

 

As far as I can tell, you are simply priveligning style over substance - a kind of "let's all put our jacket and tie on and be good upstanding Audiophiles".  You are saying "Sure, MQA is a fraud and Bob S and all his sycophants are Big Fat Liars, but we need to have a dignified response".  I call bullshit on that, and on your hypocrisy...

Can I frame your post?

 

Exactly right. Let's let MQA sell us lossy, DRM garbage that they are telling us is "master quality" and joke

about how Bob Stuart is a clever old chap. Rascal. He almost got us. Cheerio.

[Les Habitants]

9 hours ago, Dr Tone said:

Some type of reference list of equivalent masters would be beneficial to anyone doing the MQA comparison.

 

Absolutely, and perhaps then thats the point Brink is trying to make? Neither MQA nor Tidal will provide you with such a list, will they?

[Les Habitants]

3 hours ago, HalSF said:

I don’t think that MQA and what passes for label executives these days have the competence to take over the audio world.

 

When Spotify, Apple, and more than a smattering of DAC makers embrace MQA, and it starts to become a default standard you can’t opt out of, then I’ll join the barricades too. But so far I think MQA is a losing proposition, all in all.

 

I share this view, though that does not mean MQA presents no threat to consumers whatsoever.

[opus101]

2 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

With due respect, you're being disingenuous.  I asked what your opinion is of CA and you're avoiding the question.

 

If avoiding the question indicates disingenuity then you're clearly tarred with that brush as you avoided answering JA's 'why did you say I did?'.

[Spacehound]

9 hours ago, mansr said:

There is never an excuse for not being civil.

I is a human being.

Human beings have wars and stuff, often  'official' ones.  That is not civil behaviour. As a good citizen I take my lead from my gubmint -  "My country 'tis of thee".

[Spacehound]

7 hours ago, knickerhawk said:

. So he called inQuestion: What is the ethical standing of a poster in the MQA-related discussions here who first presents him or herself as objective, neutral or otherwise open to the arguments of both sides but who, in fact, is already decided and conceals a deeply partisan position? Should that person be ashamed of him/herself? Should that person be roundly condemned and then ignored, regardless of whether his position is aligned with one's own?

As soon as I saw the name 'Bob Stuart' I was inclined to think that MQA wouldn't do what was claimed (which has turned out to be true). Evidence? His previous efforts over more than 40 years.

An early effort.The controls fell off one, being attached only with sticky tape, and the other one melted at every available opportunity.

 

 

 

 

[Teresa]

11 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

To be fair, he is not a Gort!

 

Klaatu barada nikto, if I say it three times will MQA go away?

[firedog]

I'd just like to say that JA has been patient and good natured in his answers here, despite some unpleasant or inaccurate statements thrown in his direction.

Hopefully he will continue to visit the forum when he feels he has something to add.

 

JA, don't get scared away if a few members get a little nasty.

[Spacehound]

25 minutes ago, firedog said:

I'd just like to say that JA has been patient and good natured in his answers here, despite some unpleasant or inaccurate statements thrown in his direction.

Hopefully he will continue to visit the forum when he feels he has something to add.

 

JA, don't get scared away if a few members get a little nasty.

Yes. Also he remains polite if we say much the same  on Stereophile  as some of us say here  (I deliberately chose my fake name here to be the same as it is on Stereophile). He's not a 'bad' guy, is very experienced, and why  he got involved in this MQA nonsense, other than as 'news', now rather passe',  I cannot imagine.

 

It's  pity that Lavorgna was banned, though it was fully justified.  The more answers he gave  the deeper the hole he was digging for himself became. He also had a high entertainment value as one of  MQA's court jesters.

[Spacehound]

53 minutes ago, Teresa said:

 

Klaatu barada nikto, if I say it three times will MQA go away?

I think it will go away all by itself before long. Nobody I know, young or old, has even heard of 'high res', let alone MQA. And on my brief (I don't want to bore them any more than I usually do) attempts to explain either they become even less interested.

 

The 'wealthier' ones listen  to "the radio", which is invariably the still good UK FM stations,  or a CD, on their 'low'  (whatever that is supposed to mean) to mid range Arcam systems as a background to doing something else and are perfectly happy with it, as one would expect of normal human beings.