Article: MQA: A Review of controversies, concerns, and cautions

[botrytis]

Just now, realhifi said:

I believe I was directing that comment to Doug. 

 

I know, just saying is all.

[realhifi]

1 minute ago, botrytis said:

 

I know, just saying is all.

Doug’s a big boy. He can defend himself. 

[Doug Schneider]

43 minutes ago, realhifi said:

Doug’s a big boy. He can defend himself. 

 

Hi,

 

Is this "Doug" me? I'm trying to figure out what was directed my way so I can answer. I couldn't see anything...

 

Doug
SoundStage!

[Doug Schneider]

1 hour ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

You are correct in that Stereophile writer Tom Gillett wrote for the magazine using a pseudonym. This was agreed to in 1984 and was grandfathered in when I took over from J. Gordon Holt 2 years later. While I honored the agreement with Tom, it never sat well with me.

 

It might not have sat well with you, but as editor, you're basically the boss. Since the 1990s, Stereophile has been sold a number of times. Each new publishing company instills a new set of rules. There were many opportunities to change that. It can be done something like this: "Hi, to keep you on as a writer, we must use your real name. Sound good?"

 

Sam Tellig went on for decades and, like I said, for many, many years, I had no idea that wasn't his real name. At least Connaker made it clear up front the issue with his name. PLUS, Connaker made it clear that he was willing to stand behind the authenticity of the person. Is this simply a ruse to avoid addressing the story? Think about it: you're already participating in a forum that's specifically about the story -- so you're shoulders deep already.

 

Doug 
SoundStage!

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 hour ago, realhifi said:

Difference is that everyone and their brother knew who Sam Tellig really was. Not what I’d call a well kept secret. As far as I know it appears Mr. Archimago’s identity is a mystery. 

I had no clue Sam wasn’t his name until a couple years ago. 

 

Achimago isn’t a mystery to those who’ve met him and know him. It’s a mystery to those who could use his real information in unscrupulous ways. 

 

@mitchco  has met him. 

 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

14 hours ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

With respect, yes, this is a core belief of mine, and has been since I worked in a research lab at the end of the 1960s. You have something relevant o say, hang it on the peg of your actual name. Just as I have done all my life - and even Doug Schneider has done! Until then, while I have read your article, and certainly have opinions on what you have written, I shall keep my thoughts to myself.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

 

Back in the 60s nobody tracked you down online, called your employer and had an impact on your livelihood because they disagreed with you in an online forum. This has happened a few times around here.

 

This article is objective. 

 

2+2=4 no matter your name, pseudonym, etc...

 

If someone thinks this article doesn’t add up, then prove it wrong. Make a fool of me for standing up for the author and using my name as a guarantee to the CA community.

 

I’ve co-signed this loan and have no worries about creditors coming my way. 

 

 

[Doug Schneider]

29 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I had no clue Sam wasn’t his name until a couple years ago. 

 

Stereophile could've quite easily had him write under his real name or put a heading -- "This Guy is Writing Under a Fake Name" -- but didn't.

 

The "Achiamago excuse" is nothing more than a convenient excuse to wiggle out of difficult questions. This isn't new...

 

Doug
SoundStage!

[wdw]

1 hour ago, Doug Schneider said:

 

Stereophile could've quite easily had him write under his real name or put a heading -- "This Guy is Writing Under a Fake Name" -- but didn't.

 

The "Achiamago excuse" is nothing more than a convenient excuse to wiggle out of difficult questions. This isn't new...

 

Doug
SoundStage!

 

I am concerned that we may just run John A. outta town if we continually post strong negatives about him and his magazine.  Consider that he is posting here and we should welcome his participation whereas R. Harley or any of his group of writers would never dare show up to debate any of these issues.  

[mitchco]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I had no clue Sam wasn’t his name until a couple years ago. 

 

Achimago isn’t a mystery to those who’ve met him and know him. It’s a mystery to those who could use his real information in unscrupulous ways. 

 

@mitchco  has met him. 

 

 

 

Yes, Arch and I took in the Vancouver Audio Show, listening to MQA files on a super expensive rig, but no AB comparisons. Ironically, there is even a picture of us listening to MQA files in the article linked - LOL! 

Arch has been over to my place for sushi, beverages and having a fun time listening to my stereo. 

 

I can "authenticate" that @Archimago is a real person  

 

It is rather disappointing that this is even a thing. How about the science? The objective tests Archimago (and @mansr) performed are repeatable. I have not seen any shred of objective evidence to show anything wrong with Arch's test procedures or conclusions. Let's put it to the audiophile industry at large (how about it @John_Atkinson) and especially MQA to prove Arch's tests and conclusions are wrong.  Rather than words, lets see some real science! Because, you know https://xkcd.com/54/

[Archimago]

4 hours ago, realhifi said:

Difference is that everyone and their brother knew who Sam Tellig really was. Not what I’d call a well kept secret. As far as I know it appears Mr. Archimago’s identity is a mystery. 

 

Don't know if that's true (re: Tellig) since I never cared who the man was...

 

As Chris said earlier, from this site, I've hung out with Mitch @mitchco at the Vancouver Audio Show in 2016 (he actually posted on this a few pages back) and I've visited him at his beautiful home in the Sunshine Coast last year.

 

Notice that in many of my posts, I collaborate with others... They of course know who I am. It's always good to have others look over the stuff...

 

LOL, missed Mitch's comment above .

[james45974]

32 minutes ago, wdw said:

 

I am concerned that we may just run John A. outta town if we continually post strong negatives about him and his magazine.  Consider that he is posting here and we should welcome his participation whereas R. Harley or any of his group of writers would never dare show up to debate any of these issues.  

Harley is a hack and I give some credit to John for his interaction but please, John is inviting the negatives on himself!  He is beginning to look a bit desperate!

[Rt66indierock]

34 minutes ago, wdw said:

 

I am concerned that we may just run John A. outta town if we continually post strong negatives about him and his magazine.  Consider that he is posting here and we should welcome his participation whereas R. Harley or any of his group of writers would never dare show up to debate any of these issues.  

 

What we actually need is a discussion of who is in majors (baseball) and who isn’t of audio reporting. Specifically is Stereophile still in the top tier of audio reporting or are they an AAA or AA squad?

[james45974]

4 hours ago, realhifi said:

Difference is that everyone and their brother knew who Sam Tellig really was. Not what I’d call a well kept secret. As far as I know it appears Mr. Archimago’s identity is a mystery. 

I never knew Sam Tellig was not his real name!

[kumakuma]

40 minutes ago, wdw said:

 

I am concerned that we may just run John A. outta town if we continually post strong negatives about him and his magazine.  Consider that he is posting here and we should welcome his participation whereas R. Harley or any of his group of writers would never dare show up to debate any of these issues.  

 

I agree.

 

It would great if @John_Atkinson sticks around. Even "greater" if he actually participated in the discussions. 

 

[Doug Schneider]

42 minutes ago, wdw said:

 

I am concerned that we may just run John A. outta town if we continually post strong negatives about him and his magazine.  Consider that he is posting here and we should welcome his participation whereas R. Harley or any of his group of writers would never dare show up to debate any of these issues.  

 

If that's your worry, then I'll say that it's Chris Connaker's call on how he wants to run the forum. Everyone here is in "Chris's house."

 

With that in mind, I want to say that if you start letting someone run by their own rules, you stand a better chance of losing people who want no part of that. Likewise, I think guys like Archiamago and Mansr will confirm that when it comes to technical discussions, those who hide behind feeble excuses are usually unsure of their ability to contribute -- or they simply don't want to look bad. Also, I can attest that in hi-fi, I've talked with the strongest technical minds and asked some really tough questions and in every instance, no one made an excuse -- they all answered. In fact, at Hegel last June,  they sat me down and point blank asked me, "Tell us anything bad you want to about our products or company." Surprised by such a company, they let me me rest assured that I couldn't offend them -- learning negatives, from what they said, is the Norwegian way to improve. So, yes, I told them a few things.

 

No one here is name calling. As well, I can say that I and, to the best of my knowledge, none of my writers have ever been banned from a forum for inappropriate behavior. I don't believe Archiamago or Mansr have either.

 

Archiamago put out a strong article. This gains strong responses. That's all.

 

Doug Schneider

SoundStage!

[Archimago]

25 minutes ago, wdw said:

 

I am concerned that we may just run John A. outta town if we continually post strong negatives about him and his magazine.  Consider that he is posting here and we should welcome his participation whereas R. Harley or any of his group of writers would never dare show up to debate any of these issues.  

 

Very true @wdw, Harley has not availed himself over the years other than on the TAS website as far as I can tell.

 

@John_Atkinson - I'm certainly appreciative of your presence here. While we might not agree on many things, I personally do wish to see success in the audiophile press. Journalism plays an essential role in public discourse. It's good to hear of new products, see pictures of the gear, read interesting stories of the music and designers, consider opinions, etc... Guiding and growing the hobby is an important mandate.

 

While perhaps harsh at times, I think the criticisms are written in the hopes of changing the "culture" rather than malicious intent on the individual. Fairly worded or not, I think it's obvious that many believe that a change is needed. Personally, I would like to see more advocacy and education on behalf of the consumer and part of this is more objective adjudication and understanding of the science/technology/engineering.

 

Helping the consumer with a truthful, sober assessment of claims for something as foundational as a file format like MQA would have been an obvious role for the press given the years of controversy. It does get rather frustrating when something as obvious as the concerns around MQA get side-stepped time and again.

 

[crenca]

3 minutes ago, Archimago said:

It does get rather frustrating when something as obvious as the concerns around MQA get side-stepped time and again.

 

 

@Doug Schneider and @ArchimagoI appreciate the irenic nature of your posts, but @wdw concern is not grounded in reality in that @John_Atkinsonhas already explicitly stated he is not here to engage the substance of MQA, or your summary of it, or any of the threads and purpose of forums such as this one.  He is here only to correct what he sees as misstatements of fact, and to occasionally advertise an upcoming article in his trade publication.  Remember, we (i.e. "audiophiles") are the product that he sells - we are units of manipulation in a game of confidence.  He has nothing to gain by a substantive discussion

 

In other words he is not really here at all - not in the spirit of the forum.  As he says, he only engages substance on his forum - his turf only.

 

Perhaps someone remembers which thread he says this in and post a link, not that it is really needed because every post he makes confirms the above, save for the occasional slip up...

[Archimago]

7 minutes ago, crenca said:

 

@Doug Schneider and @ArchimagoI appreciate the irenic nature of your posts, but @wdw concern is not grounded in reality in that @John_Atkinsonhas already explicitly stated he is not here to engage the substance of MQA, or your summary of it, or any of the threads and purpose of forums such as this one.  He is here only to correct what he sees as misstatements of fact, and to occasionally advertise an upcoming article in his trade publication.  Remember, we (i.e. "audiophiles") are the product that he sells - we are units of manipulation in a game of confidence.  He has nothing to gain by a substantive discussion

 

In other words he is not really here at all - not in the spirit of the forum.  As he says, he only engages substance on his forum - his turf only.

 

Perhaps someone remembers which thread he says this in and post a link, not that it is really needed because every post he makes confirms the above, save for the occasional slip up...

 

Yeah, I hear what you're saying @crencaand hope JA changes his perspective on his intent in commenting here...

 

Nonetheless, I still wanted to present a comment on behalf of certain members of The Audiophile Consumer and Technical Union (TACTU) that hopefully reflects an olive branch of sorts .

[botrytis]

@Archimago- does that mean you are going to be the TACTU president or technical advisor? Chris could do TACTU thru CA......

 

Thank you for a great technical article - @Archimago

[Archimago]

5 minutes ago, botrytis said:

@Archimago- does that mean you are going to be the TACTU president or technical advisor? Chris could do TACTU thru CA......

 

Thank you for a great technical article - @Archimago

 

LOL. No, I'm happy to let the politicians manage TACTU .

 

[miguelito]

2 hours ago, wdw said:

I am concerned that we may just run John A. outta town if we continually post strong negatives about him and his magazine.  Consider that he is posting here and we should welcome his participation whereas R. Harley or any of his group of writers would never dare show up to debate any of these issues.  

Good point, thank you. I do appreciate that John Atkinson would show here and participate in the dialog. Some of us can get pretty rough at times, so hats off. I also appreciate that Stereophile has writers like Kalman Rubinson and Art Dudley who I have followed for a long while. 

[tmtomh]

I agree it would be great of @John_Atkinson remained here - but only because it is clear that the discussion here has helped shape Stereophile's coverage of MQA. He won't admit that of course, and as @crenca has noted, he's explicitly stated that he will not actually engage here, only weigh in to correct what he sees as factual misstatements about the magazine and/or him and other authors.

 

And more recently he's made a very polite but nevertheless transparent argument suggesting @Archimago's data should be dismissed - or at least not actually engaged with - because of the pseudonym issue.

 

But even with that, there's no need to antagonize Atkinson. Just because someone enters a community and behaves uncivilly by refusing to participate in the accepted, collegial manner, does not mean that we have to be uncivil or rude in response. Nor does it matter whether or not he ever will admit that CA's discussions might have an impact on Stereophile's coverage. No point in trying to fight that battle when the tone and content of Stereophile's actual coverage is the more important issue.

[The Computer Audiophile]

One other note about not engaging or not refuting data from an "anonymous" person, this is one of the first things Bob mentioned to me when he called. I'm not saying that Bob is setting JA's agenda or giving him talking points, but I just don't see why JA is sticking to that argument so hard. 

[realhifi]

5 hours ago, Doug Schneider said:

 

Hi,

 

Is this "Doug" me? I'm trying to figure out what was directed my way so I can answer. I couldn't see anything...

 

Doug
SoundStage!

He was commenting on something I wrote directly to you. It concerned equating a way of recording and music distribution to the Iraq war. 

 

[james45974]

18 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

One other note about not engaging or not refuting data from an "anonymous" person, this is one of the first things Bob mentioned to me when he called. I'm not saying that Bob is setting JA's agenda or giving him talking points, but I just don't see why JA is sticking to that argument so hard. 

Chris, I personally believe that John is reacting as such because that is the way it has always been in the print media world.  The last few years we have had this thing called the World Wide Web where there is more and faster interaction than you ever had in the print world.  I think some of John's behavior is that it is hard to teach an old dog new tricks!