Nothing against measurements, on the contrary. They are often very helpful to understand a product better. I only find them questionable, if they are taken out of context and used to harm others.
In the failed Nyquist review, JA was measuring some distortion induced by the tubes used in the product. However, in the Nyquist the tubes are used for several purposes. On the one hand to influence the DAC sound, on the other hand to clean up the power supplied to the DAC chip. In the review, JA measured the distortion in an area where it does not influence the sound. Nevertheless JA decided to include the comment. JA knows his area well, and I do not think he makes mistakes. That’s what makes this more problematic.
What is interesting, is that when comparing JAs measurements to those of any other reviewer’s, the product actually measures very well with others. This discrepancy is evident in reviews by some of the audio world’s most respected reviewers, such as Alan Sircom (HiFi+), Robert Harley (TAS), Mathias Böde (Stereo) Roland Kraft (Stereoplay) and numerous others. And if you read the Stereophile review, also Mikey actually quite liked the sound of the Nyquist.
Background of the last sentence jab in the measurement section was a commercial disagreement with the manufacturer, related to the number of ads purchased to get the review published (we all know how this business works). But it turned out JAs comment was in such stark contrast to any other top reviewers perspective, Stereophile decided to remove the product’s rating from its latest Autumn 2018 Recommended Components list less than a year after it was first published.
In a summary, I have read more great than not so good reviews from JA. But here he was caught red handed for doing something he better should avoid, for not to tarnish his reputation. That sort of political reviewing I do not appreciate, and I personally find it unethical.
PS: The sub area distortion has been rectified in the Mk2 version DAC module.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
