• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

The post in which Darko basically tells anyone who isn't a rich rube to ignore him and audiophilia in general

DSJR

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 27, 2020
Messages
3,416
Likes
4,573
Location
Suffolk Coastal, UK
Thirty years ago, I lapped all this stuff up. A colleague had got into Krell and Apogee (Duetta Signature speakers) and from there we diverged somewhat. He went onto D'Agostino and huge Martin Logan speakers when his Apogee ribbons were so loose they nearly fell out and his FPB400 went wrong (Noooooo.....) and I reached a pinnacle of larger ATC active monitors (this pair DID measure pretty well flat and were measured twice in my custodianship of them!!!) before getting married and severely downgrading.

Today, I'm becoming so damned cynical, yet still I try on other forums and Facebook groups to help people who frankly are beyond help. Nothing life threatening, but they go down their particular route and nothing will remove them from that groove. Objective proof is dismissed as irrelevant and if snake oil appeals, that's the way to go before the next big thing comes along. Apologies folks, but I can't watch these subjectivist vids for long now before I hear the bullshit starting and I start shouting at the screen!

Weights on gear? I do recall some chips being a bit microphonic (apparently). the old dirty TDA1541 dac chips I believe and I remember the first generation already sturdy Arcam JMJ CD player and amps 'liking' a decoupled-shelf rack we began to sell (a Something Solid 'XR' rack with suspended balsa shelves for our UK readers). A colleague once took his UK made CD player with slightly rattly case and bonded two 1" thick slate slabs pre-cut to size and swore he heard a sonic improvement, but we're talking thirty odd years ago now! Unless someone's done research, I'm surprised a neat little £120 dac with pretty solid metal case would respond like this and adding a massive lump like that is something only an audio masochist would do, right?

Said colleague and now old friend, waxed lyrical to me about the 'amazing value' new Transparent Audio mains cable at a mere £750 and later, the ever more expensive range of mains conditioners (I think they're beautifully dressed mains filers rather than full regenerators, but could be wrong). Apparently, you only use two of the four available sockets and have to double or triple up for a suitable expensive system (these filters cost over ten grand each I believe for the basic one). He chuckled when I mentioned my home made IEC to 13A mains cable that cost me less then a tenner in parts and the Roxburgh 6A mains filters I still use on my geriatric CD players at forty quid each (i probably don't need to here on the coast, but at a previous house, they did seem to help so bad was the mains).

Maybe I'm on the way down and out where audio gear is concerned and Darko and his followers are still climbing the greasy pole. Some audiophiles talk endlessly about resolution without the faintest idea what is actually going on in the recording or production (as mentioned in posts above). S'cuse the bleat, but I feel I'm done with 'High End' stuff that sells on looks and price with placebo high qualities..
 
Last edited:

watchnerd

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
12,449
Likes
10,415
Location
Seattle Area, USA
Although I'm not sure paying for better SINAD is really much in the way of D swinging if the amount you're paying is actually less, lol...a house full of expensive stuff is really more the audiophool club than the audiophile club a lot of the time.

That's what I love about my vinyl.

Almost everything really does make a measurable difference (alignment, cartridge loading, etc), things do get slightly better if you spend a lot more, but it all is ultimately flawed no matter how much coin you spend.
 

watchnerd

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
12,449
Likes
10,415
Location
Seattle Area, USA
Weights on gear? I do recall some chips being a bit microphonic (apparently). the old dirty TDA1541 dac chips I believe and I remember the first generation already sturdy Arcam JMJ CD player and amps 'liking' a decoupled-shelf rack we began to sell (a Something Solid 'XR' rack with suspended balsa shelves for our UK readers). A colleague once took his UK made CD player with slightly rattly case and bonded two 1" thick slate slabs pre-cut to size and swore he heard a sonic improvement, but we're talking thirty odd years ago now! Unless someone's done research, I'm surprised a neat little £120 dac with pretty solid metal case would respond like this and adding a massive lump like that is something only an audio masochist would do, right?

Well, CD players are mechanical devices.

DACs aren't.
 

CASE2112

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
May 30, 2020
Messages
59
Likes
41
Location
St. Petersburg, FL - USA
The revelation of sound was exquisite once I ascertained the true purpose of interconnects - until then all my equipment sat in remarkable dysfunction atop my desk. Electron gaps ruled the day. All that was required of me was to plug the shit together. What a difference cables make!!
 

watchnerd

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
12,449
Likes
10,415
Location
Seattle Area, USA
The revelation of sound was exquisite once I ascertained the true purpose of interconnects - until then all my equipment sat in remarkable dysfunction atop my desk. Electron gaps ruled the day. All that was required of me was to plug the shit together. What a difference cables make!!

Meh.

Wifi.
 

A Surfer

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 1, 2019
Messages
1,146
Likes
1,253
You can still review honestly even if sent samples to keep. I reviewed three headphones from Onkyo (A800, H900M and H500BT) that were sent to me by Gibson Innovations who at the time held the distribution rights. I gave favourable reviews because I felt the products were excellent value and based on the market well priced. I did not pretend they were perfect because they weren't, but I feel very confident that I represented their performance as accurately as possible, but in a subjective sense. I did of course publish the HATS analysis of the frequency response as published by Onkyo along with the reviews. Saying that, I can absolutely see if one did so as a professional how the pressure to craft favourable reviews would be considerable. If you didn't, well you would never get the gear.
 

Zensō

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 11, 2020
Messages
2,753
Likes
6,768
Location
California
I don't begrudge anyone getting stuff if it's transparent that's the deal. Z makes no secret of it, has frequent yard sales etc.

Is he an objective reviewer? Hell no. Is he a "good" reviewer? Of form and function he isn't too bad. Of the "sound"? Hell no again.

Infotainment as others have said. I don't even mind Darko when he is giving basic advice. I lose it when he goes full on shill /anti science

I agree. Z is a bit of a goofball, but entertaining and informative enough on a basic level. At least he’s self aware enough to not take himself too seriously, which can’t be said of Darko, Steve G, et al, with their smarmy audiophile spiels.
 

Sgt. Ear Ache

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 18, 2019
Messages
1,895
Likes
4,162
Location
Winnipeg Canada
You can still review honestly even if sent samples to keep. I reviewed three headphones from Onkyo (A800, H900M and H500BT) that were sent to me by Gibson Innovations who at the time held the distribution rights. I gave favourable reviews because I felt the products were excellent value and based on the market well priced. I did not pretend they were perfect because they weren't, but I feel very confident that I represented their performance as accurately as possible, but in a subjective sense. I did of course publish the HATS analysis of the frequency response as published by Onkyo along with the reviews. Saying that, I can absolutely see if one did so as a professional how the pressure to craft favourable reviews would be considerable. If you didn't, well you would never get the gear.

Sure it's possible to do an honest review. At least with headphones and speakers there are actual, notable differences in sound - differences which of course are also measurable. An honest review of a dac would in most cases discuss the build quality and the features and then a statement something to the effect that "audibly, you probably won't hear much difference between this and any other decent dac." Even with speakers, it's the preferential ranking of the assessments and the crazy nature of the comparisons that gets ridiculous. I was watching Guttenberg's review of the DBR62 last night and at one point he refers to the older Debut 6.2 speakers, and he says "I haven't got those around any longer to make a direct comparison but I know those speakers very well." I mean...come on. Steve reviews several sets of speakers every week...he's probably reviewing different speakers in the same day often. Apparently he has some sort of infallible file cabinet in his brain that specifically remembers the sonic characteristics of every set he's heard and which he can call upon at will to draw comparisons with whatever speaker he currently has set up.
 

FrantzM

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 12, 2016
Messages
4,377
Likes
7,881
One sure way to increase your "views" , is to post an inflammatory , remark, Tweet, Facebook, Instagram thing or on, whatever social media people are into... That is what he did and he'll soon realize due to the amount of comment/replies, thus interest, that he, the man, "Darko" has achieved his goal.
I will not watch this video and will carry on not reading, watching or listening to his "reviews", I never did, never will. Utterly useless.
 

watchnerd

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
12,449
Likes
10,415
Location
Seattle Area, USA
Yes, but one with a real tape measure instead of a measuring by bull.

Paying extra for what can be measured, but not heard, vs paying extra for what is heard, but not real, doesn't seem like a distinction I could explain as sensible to my mom.

"Well, if you *think* it sounds good and enjoy it...." either way, is probably what she'd say.
 

watchnerd

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
12,449
Likes
10,415
Location
Seattle Area, USA
I agree. Z is a bit of a goofball, but entertaining and informative enough on a basic level. At least he’s self aware enough to not take himself too seriously, which can’t be said of Darko, Steve G, et al, with their smarmy audiophile spiels.

The others just need to add cats.

Z's lethargic, poofy cat continuously reality-checks him with this look like, "What nonsense are you blabbing on about now, silly human?"
 

DSJR

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 27, 2020
Messages
3,416
Likes
4,573
Location
Suffolk Coastal, UK
It's all about *resolution!* - with total ignorance of what is actually in the source material and in what proportion - I believe that's why audiophiles are never satisfied, as they just don't know how things really are with the recording (the experiences I've had over my career put me straight a long time ago). Things may be different now, but I remember all the turntable shenanigans where you improve high frequencies and the bass goes to pot, you beef up the bass to get more 'power' and the highs go, either to pieces or dulled down and if an idler drive is invcolved, rumble comes in as well (many are in denial but hey, this is audiophile land). Buy an older Linn LP12 (pre 1991 spec usually) and it *all* goes to pot if truth be told, 'cos the sound is so 'unique' it rarely bore any resemblance to reality as they themselves showed me comparing master tapes to the vinyl end result - but the fans had no idea :facepalm:
 

Atanasi

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Messages
717
Likes
796
5. Ignore audio formats above 16 bit/44.1 kHz, i.e. don't worry about MQA.
6. Ignore DAC manufacturers bragging about the ability to handle formats with resolution above 16 bit/44.1 kHz.
16/48 is still essential.
 

Frank Dernie

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
6,454
Likes
15,809
Location
Oxfordshire
I think the key thing with why there is such a plethora of reviewers doing and justifying subjective reviews is really that anybody could do it.
Zero technical knowledge is necessary, zero technical aptitude is required and zero investment in costly accurate instrumentation is needed. The time taken to fully evaluate how the item works is also zero. It is cheap, cheap, cheap and worth as much as it cost. Near Zero.
Doing it properly is expensive and requires aptitude and knowledge, things which many reviewers fake reasonably well but not many actually have.
 
OP
Jimbob54

Jimbob54

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
11,116
Likes
14,783
I think the key thing with why there is such a plethora of reviewers doing and justifying subjective reviews is really that anybody could do it.
Zero technical knowledge is necessary, zero technical aptitude is required and zero investment in costly accurate instrumentation is needed. The time taken to fully evaluate how the item works is also zero. It is cheap, cheap, cheap and worth as much as it cost. Near Zero.
Doing it properly is expensive and requires aptitude and knowledge, things which many reviewers fake reasonably well but not many actually have.
Bet Darko has to pay someone to clean his flat before each filming. So there's that. Not an overhead Z review incurs one suspects. But he has to buy cat food
 

watchnerd

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
12,449
Likes
10,415
Location
Seattle Area, USA
I think the key thing with why there is such a plethora of reviewers doing and justifying subjective reviews is really that anybody could do it.
Zero technical knowledge is necessary, zero technical aptitude is required and zero investment in costly accurate instrumentation is needed. The time taken to fully evaluate how the item works is also zero. It is cheap, cheap, cheap and worth as much as it cost. Near Zero.
Doing it properly is expensive and requires aptitude and knowledge, things which many reviewers fake reasonably well but not many actually have.

I think it's more than the economics of low barrier to entry.

It's just better marketing.

Companies almost certainly get more awareness and clicks with an enthusiastic, charismatic reviewer than they do with some gear head showing graphs, making people think they're back in high school science class.

Vendors go with what attracts an audience and drives attention and, then, sales.
 
Top Bottom