Chris's Objective/Subjective moat seems one-sided

[Rt66indierock]

On 3/14/2020 at 11:14 AM, vortecjr said:

So to be fair the MQA thread should be in the Objective section and Subjective people should not be able to say they like MQA:) 

 

If it were me...I would close the MQA thread and the long stupid thread to air this place out.

 

Fortunately the OP disagrees. There are still issues to work through and I can learn a lot from some of the people that like MQA. Norton has been especially helpful.

 

I like to give people a chance to shoot themselves in the foot. And I don't recall the OP of this thread saying anything useful in the Vaporware thread. 

[Rt66indierock]

4 hours ago, daverich4 said:

I’m confused. What does whether I contributed to your thread or not have to do with this thread?

 Please reread your OP pay attention toward the end of it.

[Rt66indierock]

16 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

How about stop being cryptic and just answer the question. 

Chris based on my interactions with daverich4 I doubt he sincerely wants to hear from the technical side especially people like me who believe in both listening and measuring.

 

On another comment, Superdad is wrong about measuring and audio research. People started noticing audio research is one sided instead looking at both sides of the topic. One sided research is marketing. That is why there is criticism.  I am open to researching what noise is audible if you push it down 116dB but Superdad hasn’t made a case worth investigating.  

[Rt66indierock]

15 hours ago, Currawong said:

 

While I'm an admitted hypocrite in writing what I'm about to, as I've done this myself occasionally, I think that this attitude of using the forums to make people you* disagree with look like fools, is unproductive to the conversation. I think it contributed significantly to negating much of what was discovered about MQA in the threads about it, as now people who like MQA consider anyone who posts negatively about it a troll -- on other forums too. This is the very kind of issue about the inability to separate arguments from the people arguing them that is being discussed here. 

 

*And I don't mean "you" specifically, but people in general. I'm saying that this is unproductive, not trying to point fingers at anyone specifically. 

 

Allowing people look foolish is an economical use of time. Let opponents waste their time and energy promoting MQA or attacking MQA opponents on the anti MQA threads where they can be dealt with easily. Lure opponents to a place of the opponents choosing is a strategy as old as The Art War.

 

Your mistake is thinking I wanted a conversation. I wanted to convince as many people in audio as possible that MQA is a bad idea. Supporters of MQA can be convinced that MQA is not commercially viable.  Either way the opponents of MQA win. I’ve been very open about this.

 

Nothing has been negated about MQA’s issues. Any manufacturer considering MQA after 2016 knew they would face criticism if they adopted it. And how are these supporters of MQA going to listen to it? Tidal’s US revenues in 2018 declined 20%. Downloads, I wish you luck with that.

 

Finally, if all someone can do that likes MQA is call people trolls they don’t have much of an argument.

[Rt66indierock]

3 hours ago, Albrecht said:

 

Thanks for your comment jabbr. I almost always appreciate your posts, and reasoning ability: not to mention your experimentation, and also sharing it on these forums.

 

Setting aside the humor/sarcasm here; I can seriously ask, what is wrong with that? Personally, - no way can i afford a Meitner, DCS, APL, CHord or Berkeley top tier DAC. But I DO have a mid level- in the line APL DAC universal player that i feel punches WAY above its purchase price. I sure am glad that those companies are still in business producing quality, high performance, equipment that I'll never be able to afford but i can still hear and appreciate them/it for what they are.

 

Whether or not some people here are afraid to examine the evidence, and even do a modicum of research into why shit costs what it costs, - (and in turn has value), - is their problem not mine.

 

The audio world (and people enjoying their recordings as much as they do) would be pretty bloody bleak if every piece of audio gear had the word SONY stamped on it. 

 

The audio world was far better place when AR and Advent had a very large percentage of the market.

[Rt66indierock]

48 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Why?

 

AR made high performance audio mainstream. Easy setup to optimize meant happy customers. 

[Rt66indierock]

23 minutes ago, Richard Dale said:

I did own an AR turntable and AR amplifier back in 1974, so call me a fan. But today we have more products that are easy to set up and sound great than ever before, as well as very expensive high end components for those who want more.

 

But not as wide a market as back then. More is not necessarily better, more sometimes is just confusing. 

[Rt66indierock]

1 minute ago, Richard Dale said:

Yes, I wouldn’t disagree with that. If you don’t go to a dealer whose job it is to narrow down those choices in the light of their experience, then it is very hard for a beginner to make sense of the over whelming storm of internet opinions that are all over the place.

 

And back then dealers advertised even on TV 

[Rt66indierock]

7 minutes ago, Superdad said:

 

Wow, nostalgia can really make people forget! 

I once owned an AR turntable, and it was the worst piece of junk ever.  Horrible (sticking) tonearm pivot (truly a brain-dead bearing design both horizontal and vertical), weak motor that cogged terribly and was prone to fail, and zero isolation so footfalls and feedback were common.
 

As for their speakers: They were inefficient and their high frequency response only extended a few kHz beyond the blanket-covered Advents...

 

I knew I could lure you out with the right bait. My Ar-4xs go past 30k and the pair Hi-Fi News reviewed them in February 2015 and measured the same thing so you are wrong. One of many things you are wrong about. Am I nostalgic about them? They have been in my office for over thirty years. I've written about them search it.