dCS threatens with a 7-figure lawsuit over a review

[SIY]

But nobody would pay them for their time and they get nothing in return.
My time would definitely be too precious to waste on a company like dCS, such a company is simply not worth it. And what better way to punish such a company than by ignoring it.
As the saying goes, what is worse than bad press? No press.

If the product is interesting, I'm happy to write about it irrespective of the personalities. And report exactly what I find.

I've gotten at least three companies furious at me and one pulled their advertising. Despite that, because my reporting was solid and open, my editors and publisher stood behind me (I cannot say enough good things about them).

 

[voodooless]

that certainly measures well, but does so with operational amplifiers, non-discrete design topologies, and a few dollars worth of parts.

So what?

 

[Ismapics]

His audience enjoys the subjective take. The right he has to compliment Holo May is the same one to criticize the Bartok.

His (and anyone's else) tastes and preference have no obligation of being "scientifically sound". Although I personally love hard data to filter the BS, what really matters is to enjoy the audio. And when it comes to super expensive gear, it is even more comprehensible to criticize when the bliss isnt delivered enough.

I don't disagree, however he publishes publicly to all and the same direct consumers of the brand. Sure he can say all he wants but you need to make the distinction. Say measurements are good but that does not matter. I dont like the product. ahhhh Then why measure at all? See how a consumer (not core) may interpret it.

 

[kemmler3D]

not having future reviews of their products gives the marketing team all the liberty they want.

Not getting any reviews is very bad for any brand that doesn't have AAA-level name recognition or strong installer / retail / sales representation. If you actually need consumers to choose your products on their own (rather than have them sold by a rep) It's really expensive to generate all of your awareness via advertising.

 

[FrantzM]

I've auditioned and owned many audio systems over the years. I've found the inexpensive systems that have cheaper internal parts had the greatest degree of variation with the same speakers or headphones; while the opposite is true for costlier systems, which sounded more alike and better overall.

It's no mystery. You can look up a photo of an amplifier, DAC, etc. and then look up how much parts selection would cost per unit.

So we must believe your ears? in this forum? ASR?

ooook...


Peace.

 

[mocenigo]

Good point.

Is it enough to take a look at 600ohm graphs to confirm that given DAC manage low input impedance? Or something else is needed?

Do we have graphs of the response of the D90 into 600ohm? Such an input impedance would be absolutely crazy. (We are talking of a DAC, not of a headphone amp.)

 

[Mad_Economist]

So what?

I actually think there's a place for "watch-style" selling points. E.g. "the way we did this isn't actually any better from a performance standpoint, but it's massively harder and more complex, so it costs vastly more, and you have a conversation piece". The problem is more when people claim that using opamps makes the sound "sterile" (whatever that means) or that esoterica is inherently better sounding, but I think that if our industry matured to the point where we could admit that sometimes you just want to spend a bunch of money on a hobby and get a weird piece of engineering, we'd be in a better place.

Edit:

I've auditioned and owned many audio systems over the years. I've found the inexpensive systems that have cheaper internal parts had the greatest degree of variation with the same speakers or headphones; while the opposite is true for costlier systems, which sounded more alike and better overall.

It's no mystery. You can look up a photo of an amplifier, DAC, etc. and then look up how much parts selection would cost per unit.

I think the part of this that I find the most mystifying is that, even if we ignore that pricing can be arbitrary (I can sell you a $.10 ceramic capacitor with my logo very artfully engraved on it for $10), there really are not all that many "specialized" components which are tailored for audio signal purposes. Like, you can get your ultra-low tempco resistors and your low ESR caps, and then...what? You don't need super high bandwidth transistors for audio, you don't need anything that's to do with optimizing DC precision really, you're dealing with a very narrow little band of frequencies that starts in the multi-digit hz and ends before anything has to worry about bandwidth.

 

[voodooless]

I've auditioned and owned many audio systems over the years. I've found the inexpensive systems that have cheaper internal parts had the greatest degree of variation with the same speakers or headphones; while the opposite is true for costlier systems, which sounded more alike and better overall.

It's no mystery. You can look up a photo of an amplifier, DAC, etc. and then look up how much parts selection would cost per unit.

Subjective nonsense. you cannot look at parts in a device and judge if it will sound good or not. The engineering determines that, not part cost.

 

[mocenigo]

I've auditioned and owned many audio systems over the years. I've found the inexpensive systems that have cheaper internal parts had the greatest degree of variation with the same speakers or headphones; while the opposite is true for costlier systems, which sounded more alike and better overall.

"The greatest degree of variation" you mean that different samples of the same product have variation? This is possible, but it also depends a lot on the particular circuit. Some circuits behave in a way that is less sensitive to component tolerance. And there are relatively inexpensive tight tolerance capacitors, resistors, and inductors, so, you do not need to go Jensen or all Mundorf (I use their inductors though), or, *gosh* Duelund. In fact, already stuff that cost $100 or so has today reproducible measurements, which are more precise than the ear anyway. These measurements will not always tell you how they sound, but they will tell you that two samples of the same product will sound the same attached to the same transducers.

It's no mystery. You can look up a photo of an amplifier, DAC, etc. and then look up how much parts selection would cost per unit.

Yes, once you know how boutique components cost, you know that it sounds better.

 

[piaseczek]

Do we have graphs of the response of the D90 into 600ohm? Such an input impedance would be absolutely crazy.

I don't have such graphs. I was asking in general.

 

[mocenigo]

I don't have such graphs. I was asking in general.

Well, in general if you have, say, a 10K input impedance sink attached to the D90, then you are WAY over the level where response is not affected by impedance mismatch.

 

[Doodski]

I've auditioned and owned many audio systems over the years. I've found the inexpensive systems that have cheaper internal parts had the greatest degree of variation with the same speakers or headphones; while the opposite is true for costlier systems, which sounded more alike and better overall.

It's no mystery. You can look up a photo of an amplifier, DAC, etc. and then look up how much parts selection would cost per unit.

I've repaired ~55k units of repair and MODed over 10k units and the state of the components is not always obvious as per what is better quality and better sounding or not.

 

[Doodski]

I agree. Inexpensive audio equipment can still sound good. If it measures well and doesn't try to become a series of design compromises.

Yes, good comment. I've seen gear that has all sorts of fancy anodized heatsinks on transistors that don't get all that hot, toroid(s) and snazzy colored PCBs that appear high cost but in the end the sound was just as usual like the others. Then I've seen gear that has plain simple generic part numbers, nice topography design, good component spacing on the PCBs and sounds great. So aesthetics are not the end all and be all.

 

[Punter]

As far as design goes, I think you'll find that most of these boutique companies will use the manufacturers design suggestions for things like DAC chips. It's so cheap to get custom circuit boards made today that someone with a reasonable understanding of circuit design could probably use a CAD system to create a functional assembly without needing to work out component types and values themselves.

I forget the unit now but it was a stupidly overpriced DAC that was touting its use of dual DAC chips and a quick scan of the manufacturers data sheet showed an example of that application, complete with a schematic. So it wasn't anything special but it gives the makers a talking point that makes it look like they're investing some massive effort to create a component that will get you closer to music nirvana.

It's very easy to convince people of how your company is striving for excellence with a chunky paragraph or two containing jargon that they don't understand and sounds impressive when it's like saying "our new sedan comes with four, yes, four wheels!!!!!"

 

[mocenigo]

I agree. Inexpensive audio equipment can still sound good. If it measures well and doesn't try to become a series of design compromises.

Well, everything is a compromise. The question is what compromises have been made.

 

[mocenigo]

, but I think that if our industry matured to the point where we could admit that sometimes you just want to spend a bunch of money on a hobby and get a weird piece of engineering, we'd be in a better place.

I totally agree. Sadly, some people want to prove to themselves that they are somehow superior (for instance, better hearing), and other people want a validation of their successful quest for wealth by having exclusive stuff that must be better than what the “populace” can afford. We will never get rid of these two categories of people, and therefore there will always be someone ready to exploit them.

It would be fine it this were just between the folks in search for validation and the fraudsters. However, they need to persuade also the “populace” for this to work, because those customers need their envy.

 

[Robbo99999]

They're not simply two people having a disagreement. They both run businesses so they both need to earn the public's trust.

If someone was calling me a liar in a public space, I would definitely want to counter their claims in a public space.

If Headphones.com is to be believed (and I tend to put more trust in their side as they have actual screenshots of e-mails), then dCS is lying to make the public believe they are the victim in this.

If I'm Headphones.com, there is no way I would let them get away with that.

If the threat of litigation is 100% over, then both parties should just say they're gonna sort it out privately - and all that needs to be sorted out is if anything is going to be changed in the review, at which point when they had agreed changes then that's when we'd see the changes in the review, and reasoning would be mentioned at that point.

 

[Salt]

If the threat of litigation is 100% over, then both parties should just say they're gonna sort it out privately - and all that needs to be sorted out is if anything is going to be changed in the review, at which point when they had agreed changes then that's when we'd see the changes in the review, and reasoning would be mentioned at that point.

Seems to be the best solution for all parties, ASR included.

 

[iamsms]

I actually think there's a place for "watch-style" selling points. E.g. "the way we did this isn't actually any better from a performance standpoint, but it's massively harder and more complex, so it costs vastly more, and you have a conversation piece". The problem is more when people claim that using opamps makes the sound "sterile" (whatever that means) or that esoterica is inherently better sounding, but I think that if our industry matured to the point where we could admit that sometimes you just want to spend a bunch of money on a hobby and get a weird piece of engineering, we'd be in a better place.

I know people who buy expensive vintage computers, or newly built 8 bit computers for what one might consider ridiculous amount of money, but they never claim those computers are better at computing than my smartphone. They just like to own and sometimes use technologies made in a certain way. Wish that attitude were common in audio world.

 

[Doodski]

If the threat of litigation is 100% over, then both parties should just say they're gonna sort it out privately - and all that needs to be sorted out is if anything is going to be changed in the review, at which point when they had agreed changes then that's when we'd see the changes in the review, and reasoning would be mentioned at that point.

I agree although with the advent of @home experts testing gear the bickering and threats will continue till the manufacturers and stuff get it through their heads that it is intolerable and not suitable for the publics' needs.