A Closer Look At Fremer's SHAMEFUL Brinkmann Nyquist DAC "Review"

[Brinkman Ship]

...Since we are on the topic of shaming..

 

Michael Fremer's Brinkmann DAC review is one of the most shameful pieces every published by Stereophile.

 

It was more of a review of MQA than about the DAC.

 

First, no comparisons to unadulterated HiRez were performed, just MQA against Redbook:

 

"Listening to MQA files supplied to me for this review or streamed from Tidal HiFi/Master made two things clear: Those who claim they can't hear a difference between CD-resolution files and hi-rez MQA files either haven't bothered to listen, or don't want to admit that their claims of "CD sound is perfect" are just plain wrong."

 

Then we opinion masquerading as fact:

"MQA has been convincingly demonstrated at Consumer Electronics Shows..."

 

Then we have misleading information:

Clueless Fremer never mentions that MQA is not capable of full 24/192 resolution, in fact, no where in the piece does acknowledge anywhere that is lossy.

 

Then in the ultimate sell, out out, a man who never ever heard a digital component that bettered his precious vinyl,

miraculously, MQA bettered his precious vinyl for the first time in THIRTY YEARS. Yes a miracle right up there with the parting of the Red Sea.

 

"....when I played James Taylor's cover of Carole King's "You've Got a Friend," from his Mud Slide Slim and the Blue Horizon (LP, Warner Bros. 2561), through a Lyra Atlas SL or Ortofon A95 cartridge and the CH Precision P1 phono preamp, it didn't sound as warm and full-bodied as did the MQA version through the Nyquist. I'd never before heard Leland Sklar's bass sound so voluptuous, or Taylor's voice so mellifluous, honey-coated, and round-bodied as it did digitally, through the Nyquist."

 

...and the money shot, the ultimate slap in the face...

 

"As for MQA's ability to "fold" and "unfold" very large files for streaming and playback, hearing 24/96 and 24/192 files streamed through the Nyquist via Tidal was an ear-opener. Had this been CD sound in 1983, I'd still be an LP guy—but I'd also be all in with digital."
 

Shame Shame Shame

https://www.stereophile.com/content/brinkmann-audio-nyquist-da-processor-page-2#Hw4ff7KI65ZJpyeE.99

 

[Brinkman Ship]

2 minutes ago, rickca said:

The next miracle makes MQA profitable.  It's right there in the business plan.

Here is another earthly miracle..convincing moronic readers a horribly measuring $18,000 piece of junk would look good in the hifi rack, because along with it;s noisy tubes, you get distorted MQA...?

[Brinkman Ship]

1 hour ago, KingRex said:

I reread the article,  I don't think he is that far off on sonics of digital and analog.  My system pretty much mimics his results.  Digital is full, warm, harmonic with great soundstage.  My vinyl is more thin, not as rich but really nails the violin or saxophone sound.  It's like the vibrating diamond is a more real representation of a vibrating Reed or string.  I like my digital better for music like Bowie, Cat Stevens, Blondie. Etc.  Vinyl is great for small scale classical or Art Pepper, Dave Brubeck. IMO, on my system.  Wew, glad I got that in there (IMO that is) . 

Um, I think you are not understanding.

 

Fremer over the entire 30 year span he has been writing for TAS and Stereohile bashed digital  as thin adn unrealistic, and even the VERY BEST digital comes up short against his vinyl.

 

Here, along comes a DAC from a manufacturer with no history in digital audio what so ever, and whose turntables Fremer has positively reviewed numerous times, and along with it MQA..and now on more modest turntables than is reference, digital wins. Miracle of miracles!!!!!!

 

Incredible that a writer who has savaged digital in every review he has written now has an "ear opening" experience with TIdal lossy MQA.

 

In other words, in every other review he has ever written, he has described the digital/vinyl differences exactly the opposite of what you state.

[Brinkman Ship]

14 minutes ago, Ran said:

Why would an editor of a magazine assign a known digital hater for a digital product review? 

First, to give MQA credibility...secondly, he reviews the price, not the gear most of the time.

[Brinkman Ship]

11 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

You have made several, very reasonable, arguments against MQA. The kind of stretched hyperbole above doesn't help IMO.

 

Good or bad measurements are almost NEVER an indicator of how any one component can affect a system, - sonic character.

 

And tube typologies, depending on implementation, can be the cats meow.

 

There is no shortage of poor reviews by Fremer, - that is true. Many of his reviews are low-hanging-fruit, largely by reviewing components out of context.

While you make some good points, do you think utter tripe like this holds an $18,000 DAC to a high standard?

 

"I suspect that John Atkinson's measurements will show that the noise floor of the Nyquist's tubed output stage, though inaudible as hiss, allows less than full resolution of hi-rez files. But for those interested in a rich, involving experience of music, regardless of the numbers—and especially analog folks who find themselves interested in the world of easily obtained, superb-sounding hi-rez music now available via digital—the Nyquist would look and sound right at home next to a turntable."

 

If Fremer was not cozy with the manufacturer, and the unit did not have MQA, do you think this piece of junk would have such a softball conclusion?

 

Interestingly, to his credit, JA state there is no reason to make apologies for a DAC this expensive but that is exactly what Fremer does..a veiled slap on the wrist? But in the end JA must have been happy with the pro MQA stance.
 

[Brinkman Ship]

54 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

"" If Fremer was not cozy with the manufacturer, and the unit did not have MQA, do you think this piece of junk would have such a softball conclusion?"

 

Yes, - because Fremer writes consistently bad reviews that do not compare products, and reviews items way outside a commensurate system configuration. This leads to all sorts of problems, - including supporting the narrative that the 4 or 5 trolls that frequent this site who think that there are measurements and objective statements about (individual) components that somehow reflect how a system sounds.

 

This is to say that MQA is a cheap reverb tank filled with all sorts of other "issues" that are outside the realm of sound quality. I agree with you and support your calling out of MQA and even taking apart reviews that sing the praises of a format that no one wants, and is actually setting back advances in file playback.  This isn't Fremer's first horrible review, and it's not going to be his last either.

Me thinks we are in complete agreement at this point.

[Brinkman Ship]

1 minute ago, Richard Dale said:

I currently read Stereophile reviews online, and I also used to buy the magazine every month when I lived near newsagents that stocked it. Stereophile readers are not 'morons', and Stereophile reviewers such as Michael Fremer and John Atkinson are experienced and reliable IMHO.

 

You just sound like a loony. I don't think this kind of hysterical posting reflects very well on this website either. I find especially annoying the tendency of certain posters to refer to HiFi reviewers by their surname only, like 'Fremer', as though they are some kind of criminal. You don't have to buy Stereophile and you don't have to buy MQA recordings or kit either. I've no personal interest in MQA as it happens, but journalists should be allowed to post their honest views without these personal attacks.

 

 

..I'll let someone else tackle this delusional post.

[Brinkman Ship]

2 hours ago, firedog said:

That's not exactly accurate. He doesn't like CD, he does sometimes praise hi-res. Very occasionally he will say he prefers an SACD or hi-res PCM version to an LP version.

Examples?

[Brinkman Ship]

1 minute ago, firedog said:

If you really care, look yourself. I'm just relating what I've read in his blog. 
I do specifically remember that when he heard the all digital and class D Kii Three, he praised the sound, even when the source was a turntable, which  meant the Kii digitized the input. 

sorry, that is not good enough and not relevant... you make the claim you back it up, i’m not lifting a finger. ..you need to provide specific examples.I post direct quotes every time when I characterize reviewers positions and assertions and a link.

[Brinkman Ship]

7 hours ago, firedog said:

And btw, that's your post I reacted to. So are you still on your high horse claiming :

"I post direct quotes every time when I characterize reviewers positions and assertions and a link."?

 

Really? Did you back up your above broad characterization with your so-called "proof" that Fremer has "savaged" digital audio in  "every" review he has written? 
 

It's really funny. Inside this very thread you proved my point about how you misconstrue what others' write. All that has to be done to show that your above characterization is over the top and incorrect is to find ONE review where Fremer didn't "savage" digital. So I even gave you one where he praised it. And there are plenty of others - just look at many of his reviews of high end disc players and DACs. 

 

Try again in the future with your next quote. Maybe you'll even succeed in accurately describing what others' write. 

You are generally a sensible poster but you went off the rails. I specifically discussing Fremer's characterization of digital in relation to vinyl. I KNOW he has been somewhat complimentary to very expensive digital front ends and to SACD in general.

You offered a lazy defense of Fremer. The fact is my main point is that the Miracle of MQA opened up the heavens and parted the seas for him in vinyl comparisons, where nothing else has.

 

The dCS review, linked below is a train wreck. He says in this review, of the NINETY THOUSAND dollar set up that SACD playback of the Rolling Stones was neck and neck with his vinyl versions.

https://www.stereophile.com/content/dcs-scarlatti-sacdcd-playback-system-page-4

 

[Brinkman Ship]

7 hours ago, firedog said:

And btw, that's your post I reacted to. So are you still on your high horse claiming :

"I post direct quotes every time when I characterize reviewers positions and assertions and a link."?

 

Really? Did you back up your above broad characterization with your so-called "proof" that Fremer has "savaged" digital audio in  "every" review he has written? 
 

It's really funny. Inside this very thread you proved my point about how you misconstrue what others' write. All that has to be done to show that your above characterization is over the top and incorrect is to find ONE review where Fremer didn't "savage" digital. So I even gave you one where he praised it. And there are plenty of others - just look at many of his reviews of high end disc players and DACs. 

 

Try again in the future with your next quote. Maybe you'll even succeed in accurately describing what others' write. 

And this is kinda funny..interesting how he goes out of his way to compare hirez 24/96 to CD, but did not lift a finger to compare MQA to hirez.

 

"Right about now you're probably saying, "Fremer shouldn't have been assigned this review." Patience, please. You'll find this out for yourself. If, after comparing a familiar CD you own to its hi-rez version, you decide the CD is good enough, well then, you're all set—but I'll bet "good enough" isn't good enough for most of the enthusiasts who regularly read Stereophile, especially if another 10 bucks will get you greatly enhanced musical performance from a favorite recording."
 

[Brinkman Ship]

15 hours ago, HalSF said:

Hey @Brinkman Ship — can I ask you an off-topic question? 

 

You seem to *really* enjoy antagonistic denunciatory argumentation and scorched-earth debate, but every now and then I feel like I see a glint of mellowness and a glimpse of the hi-fi music lover lurking behind the no-rules fighter. I feel like I know all too well what you hate, despise, find shameful and dishonest, and what you revile as despicable shilling,  to the point where catching up with an overwhelmingly aggro thread like this sometimes makes me want to gouge my eyes out.

 

But anyone who cares this much must have something to uphold and uplift besides winning this tiny corner of the Internet. How about a brief ceasefire?. Could you tell me something about what you find inspiring and positive about listening to music via great gear and technology? Tell me a little about what you love and approve of? When you're not laying down suppressing fire, what is the hi-fi balm for your soul and what gives you joy and rocks your hi-fi world? Why are you a computer audiophile, what are your fighting for on the affirmative, embracing side? I don't want to believe it's all about being pissed off all the time for you, and nothing more.

...what he said @crenca

[Brinkman Ship]

6 hours ago, mdzaki said:

well I Own a brinkmann nyquist dac ii ...and is sounds amazing with the rest of my system...i'v never relied on this measurement or that ...just used what sounds good to my ears

wait...Nyquist DAC II??? They are already upgraded this thing after a year and a half? ?

 

Okay. Well I am glad you enjoy it. Not being sarcastic.