Critic's Corner

Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

Fair Enough

Posted by Charles Hansen on June 7, 2017 at 16:03:33:
>> To be fair to Robjohn, this article was prepared for publication a year ago, before many had looked behind the MQA curtain. <<

Thanks for that extra information. Now it makes perfect sense. It is relatively easy for a "credentialed authority" in a given field to pull the wool over the eyes of a non-expert. I think it only fair to give a free pass to those who have been misled. Even today it is hard for most to get accurate technical information regarding MQA - it requires a lot of digging. Like any technology MQA offers advantages and disadvantages that may or may not be suitable for specific situations. But I think it is safe to say that it is not probably not true that (as one "reviewer" claimed) "MQA's dramatic superiority made the original high-resolution file sound like a pale imitation of the performance".

However it doesn't require a rocket surgeon to follow the basic maxim of "follow the money", as folks like Linn and Schiit seem to have done. Similarly anyone who thought that either Sony (with SACD) or Toshiba (with DVD-Audio) only had the best interests of audiophiles in mind were not looking very hard. The bottom line is both were simply blatant attempts to try to take over the revenue stream the CD format had generated once those patents expired. Even at only $0.07 per disc the total was ~$1 billion per year - nothing to sniff at, even for the corporate giants.

As always, solely my personal opinions and not necessarily those of my employer or evil twin.