dCS threatens with a 7-figure lawsuit over a review

[JSmith]

It appears this matter with dCS is done and dusted... the thread is just drifting off now into various areas covered by existing threads.


JSmith

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

It is not an exaggeration to say that the tests show that we all pretty much have the same preference, and that is for accurate uncoloured sound quality, with the sole caveat of a few dB of bass level adjustment 'to taste'. Note: just the bass level, not the extension, not the smoothness.

It is an exaggeration and a mischaracterization.

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

Can you read my signature?

You have a signature?

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

Why? Maybe they know some of them. Maybe they participate at forums with them and know their state of mind. Maybe they've been to high end audio shops and have talked with them.
I've done all of the above.

Or maybe not. Best to let people speak to their own motives.

 

[raif71]

It appears this matter with dCS is done and dusted... the thread is just drifting off now into various areas covered by existing threads.


JSmith

It all ended too soon after it started. People want to see the match prolonged....just like the recent WImbledon final, straight sets? Spectators want more

 

[Mnyb]

They would have no problem if the subjective babble was positive. Thats the hypocrisy.

… and that why you really can’t make make subjective reviews other than positive ones the “babble” is always nonsense but the positive nonsense is seen as marketing by the brands and tolerated or encouraged ? They probably prefer to write their own technobabble marketing blurb , but free positive publicity will always do ?

If you going to be negative you have to back it up with real irrefutable facts ! Otherwise you can’t be negative. It will just be sh*t posting negative nonsense of a product or a brand ?

I think this is one factor ( among many ) that drives the always positive subjective reviews.

What if a car reviewer wrote that ”the spec says the weight is 2185 kg but it feels twice as heavy so this is a 5000 kg car ” or “we rolled the car onto a scale and it seems to weigh about 2200 kg with fluid's and som stuff in the trunk “ .

And we ended up with an review industry that write positive fairy tales about expensive electronics just as their readers wants to read them and manufacturers that caters to this clientele in some kind of incestous harmony ssh don’t rock the boat .

 

[antcollinet]

I still do not understand the aggression. I buy what sounds good to me. So what? Why should this aggravate others? The only poster who ever mentioned magical hearing is you.
Also some people have enough to spend 100k on speakers as well as a reasonable amount on a good dac. (I have never heard a dac that costs 100k, 20k yes). The two are not naturally exclusive.

It doesn't aggravate others.

But the mission of this site is to (almost uniqeuly) promote science and engineering based information about audio reproduction gear, and thereby counter the (IMO) fraud pushed by the - especially high end - audio industry. In order for that to be effective, we must also (hopefully gently) correct those who come here promoting the opposite.

These things (such as all (well engineered) dacs sound the same) are not - as you describe them - beliefs. They are soundly held scientific and engineering based facts.

There are also well understood mechanisms in the human perceptive system that explain why - in spite of this fact - a large proportion of people perceive differences that are not there in the signals coming out of the DAC or into the Amp.

 

[Mnyb]

I've noticed that people who should know better seem to be obligated to pander to the subjectivist crowd.

Let's get this out of the way.

There seems to be a lot of profit in subjectivist equipment. Not just high prices, but profit. It seems that many companies know and understand that subjectivists are roughly the same as Flat Earthers; illogical, unscientific and frequently deluded. So these companies seem to say to themselves, "Hm-m-m. We could make a lot of money off these people. We could pander to them, curry their favor and subsidize their wacky ideas. We'd get rich that way."

The problem with that is that you can't put the genie back in the bottle. Once you start talking that talk and walking that walk, you've in effect legitimized the Subjectivist agenda, and the little monster grows ... and grows ... and grows.

The situation is out of hand. Companies and designers thought they were going to fleece a few dumb people that were willing to shell out bucks. Instead, they're the servants of the fallacious; they have to keep up the charade and continue the lies to stay in business.

They've backed themselves into a blind corner. And there seems to be no escape.

Reviewers are in the same predicament. They need to make up imaginary crap just to stay in line with powerful (and vocal) subjectivist juggernaut. Some can do this, and they do it well. Slick, oily and given to imaginative prose, they're sharks who swim in the same pool as their prey. But some people are just not that talented when it comes to lying. They just don't have the natural knack of bullshitting people and walking away with a thicker wallet.

I have a great deal of compassion for people who can't lie well. They seem to be inept, when in actuality they are the best among us. Too often, honesty is mocked and despised, while the slick and wily are admired for their "talents".

The work that Amir does here is turning the tide, but it's a lot of slow and laborious work. What we need is a turnaround. People need to learn to face reality instead of taking shelter in an illusion.

Unfortunately, I don't see that happening soon.

Jim

Sounds like a pretty elaborate conspiracy.

It does not need to be a deliberate conspiracy. I see it as an emergent property off this kind off market, you don’t need illuminati. Just the small steps taken by individuals independent of each other but leading to this result as it is favourable for them .

System can have several optimums and stable points . And sometimes thier are not the same, the stable point is not the optimal one where we want to bee.

Just like standing behind the line at the airport conveyor would favor everyone, but as soon as someone gets closer everyone follows to not miss a spot .

Or trees that compete for sunlight by growing higher , if they could agree on 10 meters is good enough to outcompete shrubs let’s get our branches and leafs guys .

So it would take an actual conspiracy to get the audio industry good agian ! We could conspire to make the effort to try our best to only use facts and not make up stuff . To try to understand the science, to just be better at audio for real . But it’s an deliberate effort.

 

[DSJR]

I asked to point out WHY audiophiles buy these expensive items that make no audible differences.

Yeah, I see your point that they wallow in the status after the fact. But the prime motive in most cases was a genuine belief that the products make a big difference

My take in the admittedly tiny UK high-end market is that well off audio enthusiasts buy expensive gear because they CAN! A dCS potential customer would barely be aware of our favourite sub £/$500 dacs/headphone amps I suspect, as I doubt many of them read forums. Maybe they read Ab Sound and HiFi News mags, possibly Stereophile (not sure of the latter's coverage here). These clients do seem to believe, as you suggest, that the expensive gear they can afford to buy really is *better* than the bargains we here love so much.

Sorry, going off on one.

 

[DSJR]

Only the original Marantz Model 9 as far as I know along with original Western Electric amps.

In the UK here, the mid market for new products has all but collapsed or diversified, and a lot of good used gear now appreciates in value. My Quad 33/FM3/303 has increased in value almost 50% (depends on the seller) since I bought them twelve years or so ago. Quite a bit of the good stuff from years ago is holding or growing in value here it seems.

 

[DSJR]

No. It was actually Karajan conducting Der Rosenkavalier with Elisabeth Schwarzkopf (Marschallin), Christa Ludwig (Octavian), that killed it. The voices of these divine singers were so shrill I could not stand it.

Now play it via the B&W 801s that were probably used when this was mastered digitally

I'll get me coat...

 

[FrantzM]

Does @Nuni realize that if he’s been listening to these equipments or music since the late 60s, it is very likely that his high frequency hearing has deteriorated significantly? And he still claims magical discrimination?

I can't believe you've never heard of the "Audio Benjamin Button" phenomenon?


Peace.

 

[Holmz]

All these pages on a 40k $ DAC, and people on the same forum wonder why I still have, and like, my old ‘84 TT …

 

[mhardy6647]

Some of the classic McIntosh gear can sell for very high prices if it is in good shape or refurbished. I have a friend who talks about what a fool he was for getting rid of his 1960's MAC tube amps years ago, as they are worth a lot today. Amps that cost a few hundred back in the day go for many thousands.

source: https://www.worldradiohistory.com/Archive-Catalogs/Lafayette-Catalogs/Lafayette-1961-610.pdf
MC-240 @ $288.00 in 1961.
Per the US Gov't CPI calculator (no more and no less - but it's a starting point for value assessment), $288.00 in June 1961 corresponds to the buying power of $3036.32 in June 2024. Check current going rates for an MC-240. Anything above that figure is profit.

Now watch me drag this back on-topic (or at least back in that direction)!

By comparison with vintage (micro)computers, I would fully expect the value of "seminal" DACs -- or amplifiers, e.g., the earliest Class D commercial stereo ss amps from Infinity and Infinity from the second half of the 1970s -- to rise over time, as these products will have some collectible status. The original
"Apple" computers (boards) would, I'd posit, be a reasonable point of comparison.

I'll just leave conclude this little divertissimo by sharing Collectors' Rule Number One:

Keep what others throw away, and throw away what others keep

 

[AdamG]

It appears this matter with dCS is done and dusted... the thread is just drifting off now into various areas covered by existing threads.


JSmith

Concur. I’m going to put the lid back on this tempest in a Teapot before we create a micro black hole that begins to generate its own gravity.

For an update on the final resolution of this matter. Please see the Moderator Note on the 1st post. @Jimbob54 was kind enough to provide links to the final response from dCS. Thanks Jim!