Thuaveta

Powering a Pi off a USB port is possible - see here, for example.

Raspberry + HAT should do the trick...

Ah, and another reason why they can't rebuild it "like it was" is that the logs were originally laid down in a bog for 25 years to treat them against insects and mushrooms. Safe to say that's not going to happen again...

They're cut younger is much of the issue. The average age of French oak forests is closer to 150 years, when they'd usually cut at around 300. By the way, CNN fucked the translation up, and those beams were oak, not beech. There's also a small thing on Le Monde's website that quotes the head of the French wood industry association as saying that "they're going to organise, including financially, so that French oak is used". The same piece mentions that one of France's insurance companies pledged 1300 oak trees from one of its forests, in Normandy.

Just so there's no ambiguity here, I wasn't necessarily referring to the audiophiliac selfebrities with that, thinking more of Ben Lovejoy, Jon Fingas and the ilk. They've got the type and size of audience Stereophile or Darko can only dream of, could personally give a crap less about the technical qualities (same goes for their audience), and that's probably who MQA's on-payroll brain bugs are going for.

Good, there's lot we agree on. I'm surprised that someone with the kind of pretence to respectability that you project would have so little understanding of corporate messaging. That you fail to understand no target audience @The Computer Audiophile or AXPONA can provide is worth the risk for such a panel genuinely amazes me, which is why I suggested you think through what you were saying for a second. The risk of being definitively exposed as frauds is tremendous for them, and the reward is negligible, because the real target probably isn't the end-consumer, it's other corporations. What they're doing is trying to use the end-user to convince their actual targets, and that's why excited pieces are of value to them. MQA doesn't need, or want, to convince the naysayers, less so the technically adept naysayers, because they have the means to buy enough venues (be it through yellow or incompetent writers, events such as what they just did, or a combination of both, say yellow writers writing about paid-for events). They just want to both be talked about (that part's working out fine), and to have a galvanised core of fanbois amplifying their message (though I'm less kind than others, and that I'll vote naivete or stupidity over being on the payroll there).

That someone with that type of background can simultaneously not comprehend why is preposterous, I have to say, boggles the mind. If you're such a hotshot, use all of your knowledge to think for a second before playing victim and saying shit like "answering this isn't worth my time". Does all of that membership to several professional associations really lead you to believe that the MQA folks would want to engage candidly and honestly, let alone be on a panel they organised, with @Archimago, @mansr, @Miska, @NoisyNarrowBandDevice or any of the other technically credible critics ?

So does email, and so does candidly, and honestly, engaging on forums, and in, and with, publications, including peer-reviewed. All of which MQA, ltd have had multiple opportunities to do, and none of which they have shown any interest in.

Quite a resounding success, too.

One would guess that genius never heard of h.265... (and if there was any doubt to the validity of the imbecile's claim, or how imbecilistic it actually is, someone graphed technological adoption . Clearly, there's an adoption problem with new technologies because of industries failing to agree on standards). May I remind you that as long as he's drinking the MQA kool-aid, it doesn't matter to Bob's friends if he's anonymous.

I understand that the founder speaks in a soft, assured voice, and will claim to unblur your reality, if you give him a lot of money, by hooking you up to a pair of electrified soup cans. He apparently also claims to be some sort of scientist.

Maybe the critics are both smart, and grown-up enough, to not behave like the RMAF crowd, or be baited into a similar shouting match, something that the man who fancies himself a journalist seems to regret.

(...) we all know Stereophile, TAS and their writers are not getting directly $compensated$ by MQA (...) FTFY

Not DSOTM or Diana Krall, of course, but Muse's Simulation Theory, Kanye West's Ye, Troye Sivan's Bloom, for example ?

I'm certain your friend is delighted to see you use his suffering, and sacrifice, as an argument to attack those calling you out for trying to make money off of what in all likelihood are mendacious claims. What a way to honour your friendship, and what a fine side of yourself you presented with that.