"Journalists" extolling MQA need their ears tested".....

[shtf]

26 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

man you are tireless...

 

poster SLEEPER HOLD ALERT...

 

 

Sometimes I think you are too kind. 

 

Hopefully, it is possible to remain civil while holding others accountable for their actions. 

 

Of course, the greater the wrongdoing, the more difficult it is to remain civil and the greater the outrage should be.  Otherwise, there’s something wrong with us.  Either we don’t fully understand the potential of the wrongdoing or we don’t care.

 

Obviously, there should be a different level of outrage between somebody accidentally running a red and somebody like Bernie Madoff intentionally bilking his clients of $64 billon.

 

I envision MQA being Bernie Madoff and the magazine editors and staff the accomplices driving the getaway car.

 

Whether MQA succeeds or fails matters not.  It’s the intent.  And if these types are not held accountable by our outrage, they’ll just keep coming back again and again until they finally succeed.  That’s the natural result of not holding others accountable for their wrongdoing.

 

IMO, after 20+ years of the magazines routinely dumbing down the industry with a focus on bling, price, and measurements, while simultaneously carving a niche for themselves as the grand poobahs of high-end audio, they banked on our potential:

• Ignorance and naïveté.
• Lack of listening skills.
• Lack of technical skills.
• Of being easily influenced.
• Lack of concern.
• Willingness to part with our money for perceived performance gains.

While simultaneously, even though some manufacturers and possibly recording studios knew better, they realized they could not overcome the influence / brainwashing of the magazine’s constituents now demanding MQA.  Which put many of these manufacturers in a financial and performance quandary.  Give customers what they want or risk going out of business.

 

IMO, every enterprise played its role in this conspiracy to defraud the masses and continue to play its role.

 

Personally, I long for the day when I read the headlines of a class action lawsuit charging them with racketeering among multiple enterprises.  And considering the continually mounting financial damages and consumed resources they’ve already induced on an unsuspecting population, that day just may come after all.  Not to mention their end-game results which ultimately might tally up to Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi scheme.

[MikeyFresh]

3 minutes ago, crenca said:

I'm definitely with those on this thread who understand that this is not a harmless chess match where all parties are playing by the rules, playing nice, and are actually interested in the truth...

 

So am I, there's far too much at stake not to be.

[crenca]

1 hour ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

I think you are conflating so called middle ground fallacy with reasoned and civil debate.

 

And I don't get how you have been allowed to start yet another civility debate.  Like I've already said Mansr's post was a good example of a reasoned and civil speech. Yet you called it "absurd", "embarrassing", and have taken us off topic.  What's civil about that?

[MikeyFresh]

10 minutes ago, shtf said:

I long for the day when I read the headlines of a class action lawsuit charging them with racketeering among multiple enterprises.  And considering the continually mounting financial damages and consumed resources they’ve already induced on an unsuspecting population, that day just may come after all. 

 

I do too, and I don't even feel like it's particularly all that far-fetched.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

Just now, crenca said:

 

And I don't get how you have been allowed to start yet another civility debate.  Like I've already said Mansr's post was a good example of a reasoned and civil speech. Yet you called it "absurd", "embarrassing", and have taken us off topic.  What's civil about that?

 

You started the civility debate and to preach your idiosyncratic views on the topic. I was discussing extremism and also generalizations, not civilty. If your civility sensibilities were offended by my choice of words you can always complain to CC. Otherwise drop the strawman argument and stop trying to make everything about your notions of civility.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Ok let’s continue the topic at hand. As long as everyone is respectful I’m cool. 

[crenca]

25 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

You started the civility debate and to preach your idiosyncratic views on the topic. I was discussing extremism and also generalizations, not civilty. If your civility sensibilities were offended by my choice of words you can always complain to CC. Otherwise drop the strawman argument and stop trying to make everything about your notions of civility.

 

Okay, I'll concede the point.  What was "extreme" about Mansr's post? 

 

Over generalization seems harder.  It's just a forum and a comment box - generalizations are always part of it, as terms/definitions are assumed in the flow of the conversation.  But what in your opinion was overly generalized about Mansr's post?

[wdw]

2 hours ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

I was in the same row as the person who called?...yelled out that?....both Bob Stuart and Robert Harley are liars at the Los Angeles Audio Show last year after Bob finished

 

If we’re going for the bigger character assassinations let’s agree that the language should be workable.   BTW...although I am sympathetic to your views on MQA, your language is filled with references that imply you are truly an “insider”....did I miss the post where you gave us your bona fides? 

Please elaborate...Thanks.

 

 

[Brinkman Ship]

44 minutes ago, shtf said:

 

Sometimes I think you are too kind. 

 

Hopefully, it is possible to remain civil while holding others accountable for their actions. 

 

Of course, the greater the wrongdoing, the more difficult it is to remain civil and the greater the outrage should be.  Otherwise, there’s something wrong with us.  Either we don’t fully understand the potential of the wrongdoing or we don’t care.

 

Obviously, there should be a different level of outrage between somebody accidentally running a red and somebody like Bernie Madoff intentionally bilking his clients of $64 billon.

 

I envision MQA being Bernie Madoff and the magazine editors and staff the accomplices driving the getaway car. 

 

Whether MQA succeeds or fails matters not.  It’s the intent.  And if these types are not held accountable by our outrage, they’ll just keep coming back again and again until they finally succeed.  That’s the natural result of not holding others accountable for their wrongdoing.

 

IMO, after 20+ years of the magazines routinely dumbing down the industry with a focus on bling, price, and measurements, while simultaneously carving a niche for themselves as the grand poobahs of high-end audio, they banked on our potential:

• Ignorance and naïveté.
• Lack of listening skills.
• Lack of technical skills.
• Of being easily influenced.
• Lack of concern.
• Willingness to part with our money for perceived performance gains.

While simultaneously, even though some manufacturers and possibly recording studios knew better, they realized they could not overcome the influence / brainwashing of the magazine’s constituents now demanding MQA.  Which put many of these manufacturers in a financial and performance quandary.  Give customers what they want or risk going out of business.

 

IMO, every enterprise played its role in this conspiracy to defraud the masses and continue to play its role.

 

Personally, I long for the day when I read the headlines of a class action lawsuit charging them with racketeering among multiple enterprises.  And considering the continually mounting financial damages and consumed resources they’ve already induced on an unsuspecting population, that day just may come after all.  Not to mention their end-game results which ultimately might tally up to Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi scheme.

Coupla things:

 

First, this is the first time I have ever been accused of being too nice, so thanks!!!!!

 

Second;

 

"I envision MQA being Bernie Madoff and the magazine editors and staff the accomplices driving the getaway car."

 

Actually I see the magazine editors as the SEC, who were warned repeatedly about Madoff, and they ignored blatant evidence that he was running a massive Ponzi scheme, to protect the reputation of the game.

 

Lastly, your point about these magazines brainwashing it's readers is noted..they have done enormous damage to weak minded audiophiles and their ability to enjoy music..the garbage they planted, like CDs are horrible, the more expensive the cable, the better, regardless of how clueless the designer is, and the dissection of music into frequency sub divisions is virtually irreversible. But to be fair, it takes two to tango, and there has never been a more vivid example of Stockholm Syndrome that between TAS/Stereophile and their true believers.

 

 

 

[crenca]

46 minutes ago, shtf said:

•  

Personally, I long for the day when I read the headlines of a class action lawsuit charging them with racketeering among multiple enterprises.  And considering the continually mounting financial damages and consumed resources they’ve already induced on an unsuspecting population, that day just may come after all.  Not to mention their end-game results which ultimately might tally up to Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi scheme.

 

I don't think we have anything near the robust consumer protection laws for anything like that.  I suspect that if Bernie Madoff had not bamboozled so many of the elites of government and industry the reaction would not have been so severe.  Justice was swift for Bernie, in a system in which it is hardly ever swift.

 

I did read a few weeks back about a doctor and his cohorts who were thrown in jail for lying on an infomercial.  The thing is for every one that happens to another thousand get away with it...

[wdw]

42 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

You started the civility debate .....

 

No great claim to fame but it was I....it was the boys, S.T.Crowley, Crenca.....et.al that let that sorry excuse for a forum post extend well beyond any possible merit to this site.

we’re now in Trumpian times....

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

8 minutes ago, crenca said:

 

Okay, I'll concede the point.  What was "extreme" about Mansr's post? 

 

Over generalization seems harder.  It's just a forum and a comment box - generalizations are always part of it, as terms/definitions are assumed in the flow of the conversation.  But what in your opinion was overly generalized about Mansr's post?

 

It has already been discussed a few pages back. I stand by my opinion. I also note that CC has requested to get back to the topic at hand

33 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Ok let’s continue the topic at hand. As long as everyone is respectful I’m cool. 

 

[crenca]

13 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

.... But to be fair, it takes two to tango, and there has never been a more vivid example of Stockholm Syndrome that between TAS/Stereophile and their true believers.

 

 

 

 

It is odd isn't it.  The trade publications have done a good job of selling the idea that they are just a bunch of fun loving audiophile guys like the rest of us.  

 

If that is true, how could they also be so called "journalists" as well?

 

In my opinion they actually are in the main just a bunch of hobbiests who have parlaid a bit of writing skill into a sales job. So the question remains why would anybody listen to them when it comes to technical matters or any issue outside of a very narrow subjectivist "sounds like" review?  What do they know about business, digital, software, DRM, electrical engineering, math, science, or really anything of substance?

 

And then when they all mysteriously come to the same conclusion about the sound of MQA, in complete contradiction to the majority of consumers who at best can sometimes hear a small difference, well we're back to how they are really all just a bunch of salesmen...

 

 

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

15 minutes ago, wdw said:

53 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

You started the civility debate .....

 

No great claim to fame but it was I...

 

I meant in the context of this thread

[Rt66indierock]

28 minutes ago, wdw said:

 

If we’re going for the bigger character assassinations let’s agree that the language should be workable.   BTW...although I am sympathetic to your views on MQA, your language is filled with references that imply you are truly an “insider”....did I miss the post where you gave us your bona fides? 

Please elaborate...Thanks.

 

 

 

You did miss it. Norton asked the same questions and I answered all of them.

[wdw]

17 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

You did miss it. Norton asked the same questions and I answered all of them.

What...worked down the hall from someone important?   Have a business card and it is embossed!

Come on...you strut through this site like you are someone well placed in the music industry....please elaborate! 

Your comments to M. Ritter, of BADA, had that over familiar salesman language...”we’ll meet at “whatever show it was” and he.quite honestly replied who, ITF, are you?  

So the question remains.....please elaborate.  Links would work.

thanks

 

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

12 minutes ago, crenca said:

 

It is odd isn't it.  The trade publications have done a good job of selling the idea that they are just a bunch of fun loving audiophile guys like the rest of us.  

 

If that is true, how could they also be so called "journalists" as well?

 

In my opinion they actually are in the main just a bunch of hobbiests who have parlaid a bit of writing skill into a sales job. So the question remains why would anybody listen to them when it comes to technical matters or any issue outside of a very narrow subjectivist "sounds like" review?  What do they know about business, digital, software, DRM, electrical engineering, math, science, or really anything of substance?

 

And then when they all mysteriously come to the same conclusion about the sound of MQA, in complete contradiction to the majority of consumers who at best can sometimes hear a small difference, well we're back to how they are really all just a bunch of salesmen...

 

 

 

I am led to believe that Stereophile publishes good measurements. I have no problem with the writers being audiophiles or expressing subjective opinions. I agree they are there to sell something but that is not exactly surprising IMO. As for "journalists" it depends on how you define the term. Not all journalists are investigative researchers wanting to uncover the truth. This is a hobby after all. Opinion pieces are permitted.

 

The problem however as I see it is the proliferation of "fake news" to serve an agenda, and not just confined to audio.  People keep on talking about the Trumpian era but AFAIK he just gave it a name. Fake news was around before Trump. newspapers notoriously have been associated with certain political views.

[Ralf11]

On 6/17/2018 at 7:53 AM, Brinkman Ship said:

Post, by "art" at SHF...a devastating paragraph that basically sums it all up concerning the press and subjective reports about MQA-

 

"Done a lot of listening to MQA, even with a Grammy-winning engineer at his studio and his 200k home system. For a story coming in a mainstream weekly. He thought MQA was joke, of course. I was the AXPONA audio fest earlier in the year, various listening rooms and had hosts switch back and forth between MQA and the same hi-res files. Of course MQA was never as good, and it was obvious to the others in the rooms. Lots of head shaking. An Aurender rep told me that MQA is now saying their files are as good as 24/96 of the same mastering (they've stopped saying "better"). But they aren't even as good. That's the thing. Audible artifacts --- distortion masquerading as detail— were even obvious. But more so, MQA files are less 3D, and have a less inviting listening experience overall compared with the same non-MQA file. Every single time. "Journalists" extolling MQA need their ears tested -- and have the hearing test results in graphs posted alongside their stories --- these graying dudes at audio magazines who've lost a third or more of their hearing ... "

 

No "hardened show goers wowed"

No jaws hitting the floor

No  new worlds birthed

No scientific revolutions

No "what digital should have been 30 years ago"

 

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/mcintosh-passes-on-mqa-calls-it-lossy-and-distorted.757191/page-2#post-18909844

...

[shtf]

16 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

I am led to believe ....

 

I think we're finally on the same page. 

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

2 minutes ago, shtf said:

 

I think we're finally on the same page. 

 

I'm not so sure.

[wdw]

6 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

I'm not so sure.

DOH!

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

10 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

13 minutes ago, shtf said:

I think we're finally on the same page. 

 

I'm not so sure.

 

4 minutes ago, wdw said:

10 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

I'm not so sure.

DOH!

 

DOH?

Ok let me clarify. I am led to believe by posters here on CA that Stereophile has good measurements. I am not led to believe that by Stereophile. I say led to believe because I place less importance on them than some, or at least their interpretation. So far I have found not a lot that I am on the same page with shtf whether his view that electricity is just another vibration or most of his other posts.?

 

So, Does or does not Stereophile have good measurements?

[wdw]

1 minute ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

 

DOH?

Ok let me clarify. I am led to believe by posters here on CA that Stereophile has good measurements. I am not led to believe that by Stereophile. I say led to believe because I place less importance on them than some, or at least their interpretation. So far I have found not a lot that I am on the same page with shtf whether his view that electricity is just another vibration or most of his other posts.?

 

So, Does or does not Stereophile have good measurements?

 

Think you need to take a breath, post less and relax.  Best, wdw

[MikeyFresh]

2 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

So, Does or does not Stereophile have good measurements?

 

 

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

21 minutes ago, MikeyFresh said:

 

 

 

"Journalists" extolling MQA need their ears tested".....

 

Ear tests appear to be in the OP description. Comparing that to audio measurements would not appear off topic IMO.