NEW Musical Fidelity DAC

Upscaleaudio - lots of good points and interesting insight. I wouldn't, however, liken anybody's assertions to be conspiratorial to the point of being ludicrous. If nothing else, even if MF is the greatest value / gear ever made, what's up with covering every component they've ever produced? I mean, ST has covered so many of their pieces in the past 18-24 months it's almost silly. Then they've also received full blown reviews on the high-end components as they've come rolling off the production line as well. I have no experience with MF gear, but am more than willing that believe that it's excellent stuff. I'm also willing to believe that there is no direct connection between this number of reviews and MF's place on the back cover of recent Stereophiles (certainly one of the most expensive full-page ad placements in the magazine). But the combination of all this coverage, coupled with the glowing (even by Stereophile standards) reviews and the hands-on service is certainly going to bring suggestions of impropriety. Even if it's not accurate (or completely accurate), it's not "out there" to suggest that this behavior causes the opinions generated to be somewhat suspect.

And, no, I doubt anybody here thinks that this behavior is unique to audio. I'm sure if we were talking about cars, guitars, power boats or what have you that there would be threads with the same theme. I'm in a position where decisions I make can direct a significant amount of capital expenditure and am therefore exposed to nice "offers" that are, of course, not intended to influence my behavior. It's why many corporations have a "no gift" policy - they don't want this type of behavior to influence the right business decisions. Of course the behavior is still rampant, but some companies are much stricter than others specifically because they want to be "above" reproach on the topic. If you're openly hand-in-hand with the equipment supplier and potential advertiser, and all that that brings with it, you're going to legitimately bring a shadow of potential impropriety on yourself.

It is funny how the pattern of upstart vs. established plays itself out across so many hobbies. A friend of mine is into biking and, without knowing any of the brand names, I started describing the "overpriced piece of crap" made by one of the big players, that nobody "in the know" would buy because they know the real performers. Only those thousands of satisfied semi-enthusiasts who don't know any better buy that stuff. -Kirk

They have covered many of the Musiacl Fidelity products..but NOT every one. But if the product is one that deserves it, why shouldn't they? They write about stuff that is interesting and in demand, whether that is from a small compamy or not.

Look at Creek. A bit of press there, eh? How many Creek ads are there? Zero I see.

If the statements made earlier rang true, there is a full color inside gatefold ad for YBA.

Mordant Short has a full page color. Where's the juice for that? So does Canton. And Ar. And Viola. How many more? It's silly. In fact it appears the reverse is true.

How about the Richard Gray's Power Company? He has a half page color and if my memory serves me well...that has not bought him a thing. I recall a review he may not have dug.

How about full color from SMART? Half page color for Acoustic Dreams? Where's the payback?

If I have any gripe with reviewers, it's that they may take a contrary position to a brand or model that's "hot" either consciously or subconsciously. Or if a brand is not "stylish" they won't say how really good it is...esp if it's a model or line that has been around or beat up anywhere else.

Good example is Sonic Frontiers which made amps that were no doubt some of the best ever. Class A..and you could not deny their performance and engineering...but the last reviews were written with less "oomph".

On the small company thing....some small brands overcharge like crazy...at obscene levels for what you get. I think every product should be judged on it's own merit. I also think that there are some brands that work on a lower margin, giving you more for your dollar.

Musical Fidelity is no doubt one of those, and it can be witnessed by taking the lid off and comparing them to Levinson and many others.

Where would you advertise if you were Creek or YBA? There are obviously companies that try to go word-of-mouth for their advertising, but if you're going to run print ads, don't you pretty much have to go through Stereophile, or maybe a combination of a couple other avenues? Just because there are advertisers who aren't personal acquaintances with ST, having dinner with him, personally delivering and setting up their gear to be reviewed, and having their product covered by him every other issue doesn't change the look of impropriety for those that do.

I don't much care if the "politics" of getting good reviews is thick or thin. They charge a buck an issue for their magazine, so I'll read it. They can cover whatever they want, acquire it however they want, and have any opinion they want. They do a lot of things that are incredibly informative and objective. They have a lot of good reviewers. In general, I think they're an excellent magazine. They also walk an interesting tight rope in their commentary, which is sure to draw commentary from the bleachers, and a few of their practices amplify the commentary. -Kirk

Interesting remarks and rebuttals written above; at my level, I may be least appropriate to add to this discussion.

I wouldn't say for sure that "You can't buy a good review at Stereophile". I have no first hand facts either. But I have talked with a few people much farther up the latter than I that can be more convincing that it this is possible; I am not one to jump on the conspiracy bandwagon though.

If there didn’t seem anything peculiar to all the MF reviews and the most recent in particular, there wouldn't be a number of people chiming in. True, none of us knows for sure, but the behavior draws attention to itself.

As for him jumping on a plane and hand delivering the product, Upscaleaudio stated, “If you were the owner of a small company you would not make sure everything lined up?". If he was so desirous to have "all things line up", then why didn't spend some time trying the unit out first? Also, what does "owning a small company" have to do with this being more important over any other company? (I am not being ultra critical here, just my observations on the comments.)

I really thought the comments by Upscale about people’s thoughts of a company at "start up" or "young" versus when they are full scale were very insightful!

I also liked the fact of Upscale pointing out that there are many brands advertising and not getting reviews. (Although this leads us back to why is MF so blessed to have as many reviews in such a short time period?)

And as alluded to, we have our favorites, if I have a favorite brand, I am more curious to try theirs latest out.

Upscale, your closing statement left me a little puzzled, about pulling the lid and comparing products and you specifically mentioned MF and ML. I am not sure what you meant by it.

I have only seen pictures of both products with their hoods off. From what I have seen, the MF is far more simplistic, and I don't mean that in that one is better than the other. From what I can see and gather, ML has more to it than the MF. (Again, I am not implying anything about sonics here.)

I have recently talked with two companies that do modifications and I asked a question about an ML amp and each had nothing but high praise for what is in them and how they are constructed and designed.

I think we are blessed by those who can afford to advertise, as this helps continue this hobby. I also hope magazines like Stereophile, TAS and others can continue.

Just because the magazine as a corporate entity "can't be bought", that doesn't mean that individual contributors can't. One would be foolish to think that ANY "organization" was made up of 100% loyal and upright employees.

The statement that Blackie contributed regarding Audio Advisor and Sam "Tellig's" business affiliation is quite interesting and bares checking into. If it is true, i would consider this a breech of ethics to the highest degree.

Someone would be foolish to think that favours don't take place in every line of business. As such, audio is no different. With that in mind, some companies and products that deserve recognition and reviews are passed over simply because "favours" are being exchanged. The favours that reviewers do is to expose / pump up specific products / product lines in exchange for being able to keep the products reviewed at no charge, obtaining other products from said manufacturer / distributor at no cost, being the first to see and comment on new products, etc... After all, reviewers that are "in the know" about new products and industry trends are sought after just like reporters that can sniff out stories.

Besides that, i have talked to a few reviewers that were selling "review models" or that had told me of how their "reference systems" had come about. Believe me, these guys normally CAN'T afford this type of gear. The fact that they can keep "review samples" and then unload them for 100% profit can finance a LOT of audio ( and non audio ) projects.

Nobody can justify covering well over a half dozen components from one company within less than two or three years, let alone one reviewer doing such. This is especially true given the amount of manufacturers and quality of gear that are being neglected to do so.

As to the build quality of MF, it is nothing special at all. Nor is the sound that it produces. I will agree that it is all pretty solid stuff for the money though. I say this having owned a half dozen different pieces of their gear and still owning a few. Anybody that makes "glorious" statements about MF is either lacking exposure to various competitive components or has something to gain by promoting such ideals. The fact that Kevin / UpscaleAudio is a Musical Fidelity dealer tends to support the latter theory. He has surely been exposed to other "more than adequate" product lines in his life to make these statements blindly.

I am out of this conversation and thread for good. I do not need to get sued or dragged into court. I am stating what is strictly my opinion based on first hand knowledge coming from several different horse's mouths. If you think i'm talking trash here, John Atkinson had already threatened to see me in court on a previous occasion. That is, until we privately discussed information that he could not deny nor want revealed to the public. As i had stated on AA and promised to John, what he and i discussed WILL remain private. Even if i don't agree with some of his magazine's policies or actions.

I hope that some of you have woken up from what has been said here and in other related forums. Start supporting the underground mags that don't accept advertising, return their review samples and pay attention to whom their employees associate with. Sean
>