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

[christopher3393]

33 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

So you only support selective civility?

 

How is that even implied in my statement?  

[Albrecht]

8 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

I was simply pointing out that I find your tendency to call people who disagree with you "trolls" childish.

Nope, - I only call people trolls who are engaging in trolling behaviour. (Did I call Brinkmann Ship a troll)? no...

 

Those few (vast, vast, minority) of anti-audiophiles who come onto an audiophile website in order to attack & disrupt and call audiophiles delusional: essentially making ignorant claims on the basis of bogus & irrelevant information, - without conducting any testing themselves or seeking or respecting the knowledge gleaned by the vast majority.

If someone's purpose here is to start fights and disrupt, - by attacking, - and not considering the positions of vast majority of the site, - then they meet the definition of trolling. (A perfect example of this is the recognized/identified trolls on the USB cable comparisons thread).

[christopher3393]

24 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

I was simply pointing out that I find your tendency to call people who disagree with you "trolls" childish.

 

I wonder if you would be surprised how many here might share Albrecht's opinion. Doesn't make it true, but you'd have a big group of "childish" on both sides of the big divide if this were known, methinks. I agree that "troll" is tossed around too much, but I wonder if you are selective regarding whose usage is a concern. 

 

Again, it strikes me as ironic that you've never to my knowledge suggested that Brink's calling people he disagrees with all sorts of names might be childish ..or worse.  Molehill, meet mountain.

[kumakuma]

2 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

Nope, - I only call people trolls who are engaging in trolling behaviour. (Did I call Brinkmann Ship a troll)? no...

 

Those few (vast, vast, minority) of anti-audiophiles who come onto an audiophile website in order to attack & disrupt and call audiophiles delusional: essentially making ignorant claims on the basis of bogus & irrelevant information, - without conducting any testing themselves or seeking or respecting the knowledge gleaned by the vast majority.

If someone's purpose here is to start fights and disrupt, - by attacking, - and not considering the positions of vast majority of the site, - then they meet the definition of trolling. (A perfect example of this is the recognized/identified trolls on the USB cable comparisons thread).

 

I'm sorry but I disagree.

 

In my experience, the "vast majority" of people are usually wrong and forward progress occurs when people challenge and disrupt. 

[kumakuma]

1 minute ago, christopher3393 said:

 

I wonder if you would be surprised how many here might share Albrecht's opinion. Doesn't make it true, but you'd have a big group of "childish" on both sides of the big divide if this were known, methinks. I agree that "troll" is tossed around too much, but I wonder if you are selective regarding whose usage is a concern. 

 

Again, it strikes me as ironic that you've never to my knowledge suggested that Brink's calling people he disagrees with all sorts of names! Molehill, meet mountain.

 

I accept your feedback.

[Richard Dale]

On 9/24/2018 at 2:23 AM, Brinkman Ship said:

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...?

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.

 

 

[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.

[crenca]

1 hour ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

RMAF is coming up. So time get shots in at audio journalists and increase the pressure they are under. For relief I'm bringing a blue laser pointer so I can trick them just like MQA does. 

 

A big and hardy LOL!  Thanks...

[Albrecht]

15 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

I'm sorry but I disagree.

 

In my experience, the "vast majority" of people are usually wrong and forward progress occurs when people challenge and disrupt. 

I would suggest that in this case, - all of the evidence points to a Catholic Church-like propagation of dogma as the very few disrupting trolls are not engaging and testing, and presenting counter evidence and arguments, and good scientific testing that encompass reasonable positions to the contrary: read, - sarcastic, (unfunny), - name calling.

 

They are not interested in "advancing" or they would conduct tests and produce contrary evidence.

 

Most of the speculations are parroted from other's (irrelevant, or un-correlated) pseudo-science, - where the conclusions are made first, - then inadequate testing is done only to support the conclusions.

Some of these folks play "support the person" drawing conclusions from bad or no testing. And, - of course, - they make sure that they ignore the evidence that is presented by the engineers and developers like Swenson and Charly Hanson. Those two are examples of folks who are truly making advancements, - not by who they are, - but by their work.

[Alcap]

Guys !

[Rt66indierock]

1 hour 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.

 

 

 

Richard have you met Stereophile writers and John Atkinson face to face I have?  And the burden of proof is on you to show these are honest opinions about MQA. Everything they write resembles product placement which is generally compensated some way.

[KingRex]

4 hours ago, Brinkman Ship said:

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.

I believe I understand all the political hyperbolic rhetoric that may be spot on.  I am not questioning that.  I am simply stating his conclusion of sonics matches the results I have obtained at my house.   And maybe Brinkman is the only DAC good enough to meet Fremers high expectations! !!!!!!!)  

[Richard Dale]

2 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Richard have you met Stereophile writers and John Atkinson face to face I have?  And the burden of proof is on you to show these are honest opinions about MQA. Everything they write resembles product placement which is generally compensated some way.

I've never met John Atkinson face to face, but I was reading what he wrote in HiFi News a long time ago even before he joined Stereophile.  As far as I'm concerned John Atkinson and Michael Fremer will write about what they hear, without any influence from 'product placement' because they don't know any other way, and they both have no need for any sort of financial kick-back from the MQA backers either.

 

I don't personally care about DSC, SACD or MQA and all the other failed audiophile formats. MQA in particular seems to be an answer to a problem I don't have.

 

I posted a reply to a post on this thread because it described readers of Stereophile reviews as 'morons'. Funnily enough I took exception to that.

[crenca]

12 minutes ago, Richard Dale said:

I've never met John Atkinson face to face, but I was reading what he wrote in HiFi News a long time ago even before he joined Stereophile.  As far as I'm concerned John Atkinson and Michael Fremer will write about what they hear, without any influence from 'product placement' because they don't know any other way, and they both have no need for any sort of financial kick-back from the MQA backers either.

 

 

Naive at best...can I interest you in some beachfront property in Arizona?

[KingRex]

15 minutes ago, Richard Dale said:

I've never met John Atkinson face to face, but I was reading what he wrote in HiFi News a long time ago even before he joined Stereophile.  As far as I'm concerned John Atkinson and Michael Fremer will write about what they hear, without any influence from 'product placement' because they don't know any other way, and they both have no need for any sort of financial kick-back from the MQA backers either.

 

I don't personally care about DSC, SACD or MQA and all the other failed audiophile formats. MQA in particular seems to be an answer to a problem I don't have.

 

I posted a reply to a post on this thread because it described readers of Stereophile reviews as 'morons'. Funnily enough I took exception to that.

Read this.

 

https://www.audionirvana.org/forum/the-audio-vault/general-audio/97134-stereophile-recommended-components-list

[Richard Dale]

3 minutes ago, KingRex said:

Read this.

 

https://www.audionirvana.org/forum/the-audio-vault/general-audio/97134-stereophile-recommended-components-list

A bit of tooing and froing on an audio forum - so what?

[Rt66indierock]

7 minutes ago, Richard Dale said:

I've never met John Atkinson face to face, but I was reading what he wrote in HiFi News a long time ago even before he joined Stereophile.  As far as I'm concerned John Atkinson and Michael Fremer will write about what they hear, without any influence from 'product placement' because they don't know any other way, and they both have no need for any sort of financial kick-back from the MQA backers either.

 

I don't personally care about DSC, SACD or MQA and all the other failed audiophile formats. MQA in particular seems to be an answer to a problem I don't have.

 

I posted a reply to a post on this thread because it described readers of Stereophile reviews as 'morons'. Funnily enough I took exception to that.

 

I consider audiophiles normally distributed so half are on the wrong side of the bell curve, another third are on the upper half of mediocre leaving one in six worth listening to. The Stereophile readers I meet at shows are not an impressive group. And it would be unfair to expect the knowledge and experience of "The Fraternity" in the vast majority of Stereophile or The Absolute Sound readers but if you stopped fawning over the writers you might learn more. 

 

Audio journalists

[Richard Dale]

Just now, Rt66indierock said:

 

I consider audiophiles normally distributed so half are on the wrong side of the bell curve, another third are on the upper half of mediocre leaving one in six worth listening to. The Stereophile readers I meet at shows are not an impressive group. And it would be unfair to expect the knowledge and experience of "The Fraternity" in the vast majority of Stereophile or The Absolute Sound readers but if you stopped fawning over the writers you might learn more. 

 

Audio journalists

An insult with pictures - thank you!

[Rt66indierock]

1 minute ago, Richard Dale said:

An insult with pictures - thank you!

 

You should see what happens on a golf site. I have whole folder full of sheep pictures. I'm bringing four of my favorites to RMAF all glossy and nice.

[Rt66indierock]

31 minutes ago, KingRex said:

I believe I understand all the political hyperbolic rhetoric that may be spot on.  I am not questioning that.  I am simply stating his conclusion of sonics matches the results I have obtained at my house.   And maybe Brinkman is the only DAC good enough to meet Fremers high expectations! !!!!!!!)  

 

Probably a good time to point out Tidal MQA is slightly louder than the CD stuff. So if you aren't volume matching........

[KingRex]

11 minutes ago, Richard Dale said:

A bit of tooing and froing on an audio forum - so what?

Did you read page 2. That is a reviewer telling you what goes on.  I believe Richard is being honest on how and why what gets reviewed. 

[esldude]

3 hours ago, Albrecht said:

I would suggest that in this case, - all of the evidence points to a Catholic Church-like propagation of dogma as the very few disrupting trolls are not engaging and testing, and presenting counter evidence and arguments, and good scientific testing that encompass reasonable positions to the contrary: read, - sarcastic, (unfunny), - name calling.

 

They are not interested in "advancing" or they would conduct tests and produce contrary evidence.

 

Most of the speculations are parroted from other's (irrelevant, or un-correlated) pseudo-science, - where the conclusions are made first, - then inadequate testing is done only to support the conclusions.

Some of these folks play "support the person" drawing conclusions from bad or no testing. And, - of course, - they make sure that they ignore the evidence that is presented by the engineers and developers like Swenson and Charly Hanson. Those two are examples of folks who are truly making advancements, - not by who they are, - but by their work.

There has been so much good investigation and posting of useful information it would take you quite a while to read it.  You haven't been paying attention if you missed it unless you wouldn't recognize it in the first place. 

[firedog]

13 hours ago, Brinkman Ship said:

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.

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.

[Superdad]

12 hours ago, Rt66indierock said:

RMAF is coming up. So time get shots in at audio journalists and increase the pressure they are under. For relief I'm bringing a blue laser pointer so I can trick them just like MQA does. 

 

What’s the blue laser pointer for?  Will it distract journalists the way it does my cats?  Will they chase thier tails in the exhibitor demo rooms?  

[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?