?Shout out to all male audioguys
Who adore rational thinking
We are all community and that stays together
Money is something we know but don't mind
Let's keep the dacs where they belong
In our homes we made so sweet and nice
My personal interest is to come up with a universal solution to this problem. Otherwise, it will keep coming up. Heck, there may have been many such instances where reviewers have been shut down and we don't know about it. I myself am suffering to tune of $5,000 a year in insurance to cover this risk! We are talking $15,000 for the last three years alone which could have gone to a better cause.Seems to be the best solution for all parties, ASR included.
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!!!!!"
Perhaps make up some template documents that you can use to approach companies that make gear that you test. So they have a opportunity to comment and contribute to the thread in question. I believe you do this now?My personal interest is to come up with a universal solution to this problem. Otherwise, it will keep coming up. Heck, there may have been many such instances where reviewers have been shut down and we don't know about it. I myself am suffering to tune of $5,000 a year in insurance to cover this risk! We are talking $15,000 for the last three years alone which could have gone to a better cause.
Consider language barrier and he is trying to say hi and introduce himself. Let’s try to be nice. At least until his 3rd or 4th post.
Damn. I have been eyeing this gold and emerald blinged out Walker and that $15K of cheddar would put a dent in the down payment.We are talking $15,000 for the last three years
Was only a ? What's the meaning of this? Question. No more intended.Consider language barrier and he is trying to say hi and introduce himself. Let’s try to be nice. At least until his 3rd or 4th post.
But with such DACs you don't have a big difference in the value of the components used.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.
The man is sure talented and funny! As were the producers with this schtick.Clarkson jokingly filled up a Tesla with a team of lawyers in order not to say anything wrong in his review, after they had sued him, just to show how absurd the situation was.
View attachment 381353
People are spending big bucks to pay for the manufacturer to show off their prized component in a premium space at all the hifi shows. Just like one of the “benefits” of owning a Rolex is seeing it on billboards and in magazines.But with such DACs you don't have a big difference in the value of the components used.
Look at the components used in the DAC discussed here and compare it with a Gustard X26 Pro or an X30, for example. Do you think there is a big difference between the pure component costs?
Apart from the housing.
Of course development costs are important and have to be paid, but at a certain point the customer pays at least 50% for the exclusivity and the name.
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.
Have you seen his Farm Show?The man is sure talented and funny! As were the producers with this schtick.
Coverage B of CGL insurance policies is designed to protect against the risk of litigation for exactly this situation (among others).My personal interest is to come up with a universal solution to this problem. Otherwise, it will keep coming up. Heck, there may have been many such instances where reviewers have been shut down and we don't know about it. I myself am suffering to tune of $5,000 a year in insurance to cover this risk! We are talking $15,000 for the last three years alone which could have gone to a better cause.
What we need is a public registry of companies/corporations who have employed legal tactics/SLAPPs to intimidate and silence reviewers. Details of each incident need to be documented as thoroughly as possible, to support the claim that unjust legal force (or threat thereof) was used. Reviewers can then point out that they will not review said companies' products, and also emphasise that customers may not be able to make informed decisions if only approved reviews are allowed.My personal interest is to come up with a universal solution to this problem.
In short, this entire storm in a teacup