JVS Cheerleads an MQA CD..Sis Boom Bah!

[John_Atkinson]

20 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

@Brinkman Ship You're causing me to receive emails about potential copyright violations. Please stop copy / pasting entire articles form other sites. Just use the snippets that matter to make your point.

 

Thank you Chris.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

[John_Atkinson]

6 minutes ago, Spacehound said:

23 minutes ago, mav52 said:

Did you intentionally covered up the right corner.  Front cover bottom right  MQA and an article page 51 by Austin

Read more  

Got him!

 

He covered up the mailing label, to keep his address private. In addition, the cover of issues mailed to subscribers is somewhat different from those sold on newsstands or via Zinio, to make room for the label area.

 

And to address the confusion evidenced elsewhere in this thread, MQA CDs play normally on a regular CD player, albeit with reduced resolution. But if you feed the 16/44k1 S/PDIF or AES3 datastream from the player's digital output to an MQA-capable DAC, it will be unfolded in the usual way

 

And please note that Jason's name is Serinus, not Sirinus or Serinius.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

[John_Atkinson]

10 hours ago, Spacehound said:

And  page 51 omitted from  the contents pages? We are not as dumb as you appear to think.

 

It's listed there on the first Contents page, p.3. Even mentions that demonic acronym "MQA."

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

[John_Atkinson]

4 hours ago, plissken said:

The issue is that even if that is done to standard I think you will still receive those notices because there are people that are making sure it's turned in because on their own forum they can simply silence people with the ban hammer, and on others they can simply DMCA you.

 

Not at all, as far as Stereophile is concerned. I have no problem with posters to CA quoting from Stereophile's copyrighted content, as long as the quoted text conforms to the "fair use defense" guidelines. I do request that in those cases the poster include a link to the original so that others can read the entire text if they so wish.

 

Where I have contacted Chris is where the poster republished so much of the original text that it wouldn't qualify, in my not-uninformed opinion, as "fair use." We take great care not to infringe people's copyrights; we expect others to do likewise. Thank you for doing so.

 

Regarding the "ban hammer," please note that the entire history of the Stereophile website, IIRC, we have only banned 5 posters, all but one because they refused to include their professional affiliation in their postings. Crenca, Spacehound, Indydan, Archimago, and other members of the "we oppose MQA" fraternity are all still active on Stereophile.com and although RT66indirock hasn't posted on our site for a while, his account isn't blocked.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

[John_Atkinson]

Just now, plissken said:

That's not quite accurate as some of whom you mentioned have been banned at Stereophile verticals. 

 

Of course. I thought it clear that I was speaking on behalf of Stereophile, not AudioStream or the other "verticals', whose editors are free to make their own decisions.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile