This review made me chuckle

[Michaels HiFi]

Anyone see the irony in this review? I took out the product name for the sake of this posting:

"The XX proved as solid and reliable as it looks. There were just a few glitches. When I switched inputs from "Analog" to "Network," the XX reverted to standby and required a few on/standby/on sequences before everything synched. Once I got hip to that process, I began putting the unit into standby before changing inputs. Since most users aren't going to be switching DACs back and forth every day or two—a reviewer's experience is unique—this won't prove a real-world encumbrance."

Huh? How is that proving to be solid and reliable? And I switch all the time from the network on my streamer to the analog input, so how is that unique only to a reviewer? And finally HOW is it acceptable to have to do a multiple-step process every time I want to change inputs, yet that is "solid and reliable"???

Reading that made me laugh.

 

[mep]

How about a link to the review? Does the instruction manual for the device in question state to put the unit in standby before switching inputs?

 

[Michaels HiFi]

How about a link to the review? Does the instruction manual for the device in question state to put the unit in standby before switching inputs?

Ummmmm...if the manual stated that then it would have said so in the review. It is NOT supposed to operate that way and I have confirmed with a dealer it is not supposed to do this yet is part of it being "buggy" and happens on other units so it is not a one-off.

You know the drill - can't actually come out and say it's an issue on the unit.

 

[mep]

Ummmmm...if the manual stated that then it would have said so in the review. It is NOT supposed to operate that way and I have confirmed with a dealer it is not supposed to do this yet is part of it being "buggy" and happens on other units so it is not a one-off.

You know the drill - can't actually come out and say it's an issue on the unit.

You didn't have a problem buying a Pass Labs INT-60 from Mike and posting a "review" of it on your YouTube channel where you trashed the unit and then further posting on AS that it was built like a Fisher-Price toy so I don't understand your reluctance to post a link to a review that makes you chuckle.

 

[Michaels HiFi]

You didn't have a problem buying a Pass Labs INT-60 from Mike and posting a "review" of it on your YouTube channel where you trashed the unit and then further posting on AS that it was built like a Fisher-Price toy so I don't understand your reluctance to post a link to a review that makes you chuckle.

Sorry, I only hear static. . Try being nice instead of the always angry reviewer schtick (I looked up your past posts on this forum). It's not a good look for PF.

And I can see why an HONEST review of the Pass would come across as "trashing it" to old school legacy reviewers. Kinda proves what we've all thought about the reviews.

Oh, and the review made me chuckle as it shows just how in the tank so many reviewers are yet they cry and scream they are not. It's ok, we all know the truth just like the old emails between PF and Arthur Salvatore.

Don't you find it exhausting being so offended by every post that have nothing to do with you?

 

[Porsche]

this post makes me chuckle, mep is right on this, why mention something if you are not going to post the article, etc

 

[Michaels HiFi]

this post makes me chuckle, mep is right on this, why mention something if you are not going to post the article, etc

Glad you had a good chuckle as well! The point was about the calisthenics witnessed in reviews rather than just calling it as it is. I didn't post the link as it wasn't about the unit, but about reviewers.

But if people can't get past that point, here ya go: Boulder 866 integrated amplifier Page 2 | Stereophile.com

 

[mep]

Sorry, I only hear static. .

That would explain some things.

Try being nice instead of the always angry reviewer schtick (I looked up your past posts on this forum).

You must be a snowflake. I simply asked you to post a link to the review and you refused.

And I can see why an HONEST review of the Pass would come across as "trashing it" to old school legacy reviewers. Kinda proves what we've all thought about the reviews.

So let's talk about "HONEST" reviews. How long from the time the INT-60 hit your doorstep and you wheeled it in on a dolly until you "reviewed" it? Less than two weeks or two weeks tops? The INT-60 wasn't even broken in yet before you "reviewed" it. How was that fair to the Pass Labs brand? That's what a hack would do.

Oh, and the review made me chuckle as it shows just how in the tank so many reviewers are yet they cry and scream they are not. It's ok, we all know the truth just like the old emails between PF and Arthur Salvatore.

Please explain to me how the reviewer "was in the tank" when he mentioned a glitch he discovered when switching inputs in his review which made you chuckle. That's why I want a link to the review so I can read what he actually wrote without your spin on it.

Don't you find it exhausting being so offended by every post that have nothing to do with you?

In light of the facts, this makes no sense at all which coming from you is hardly a surprise.

 

[Mikado463]

Zzzzzzzzzzz :lol:

 

[mep]

Anyone see the irony in this review? I took out the product name for the sake of this posting:

"The XX proved as solid and reliable as it looks. There were just a few glitches. When I switched inputs from "Analog" to "Network," the XX reverted to standby and required a few on/standby/on sequences before everything synched. Once I got hip to that process, I began putting the unit into standby before changing inputs. Since most users aren't going to be switching DACs back and forth every day or two—a reviewer's experience is unique—this won't prove a real-world encumbrance."

Huh? How is that proving to be solid and reliable? And I switch all the time from the network on my streamer to the analog input, so how is that unique only to a reviewer? And finally HOW is it acceptable to have to do a multiple-step process every time I want to change inputs, yet that is "solid and reliable"???

Reading that made me laugh.

After you posted the link to the review and I found out what piece of gear you were talking about, I downloaded the owner's manual. If the Boulder 866 really "reverted to standby" when switching inputs, that's not a glitch it's a problem. On page 23 of the manual where it explains the standby feature, it's clearly obvious that during a listening session you should never place the 866 into standby. "Pressing the button will put the 866 into Standby mode. This will turn OFF all circuits except for the logic necessary to wake it up again." Page 24 of the owner's manual has a note that says "There will be a slight delay when switching from one source to another. This is necessary to allow the circuitry to adjust to the new input source and synch the app and front panel display."

The bottom line is there is supposed to be a delay when switching inputs on the 866. That's the way the 866 was designed and it's not a glitch. The owner's manual clearly spells that out for all who take the time to read it. There isn't a "multiple-step process every time I want to change inputs..." as you said. You change inputs and wait until the circuitry adjusts "to the new input source and synch the app and front panel display."

 

[Michaels HiFi]

After you posted the link to the review and I found out what piece of gear you were talking about, I downloaded the owner's manual. If the Boulder 866 really "reverted to standby" when switching inputs, that's not a glitch it's a problem. On page 23 of the manual where it explains the standby feature, it's clearly obvious that during a listening session you should never place the 866 into standby. "Pressing the button will put the 866 into Standby mode. This will turn OFF all circuits except for the logic necessary to wake it up again." Page 24 of the owner's manual has a note that says "There will be a slight delay when switching from one source to another. This is necessary to allow the circuitry to adjust to the new input source and synch the app and front panel display."

The bottom line is there is supposed to be a delay when switching inputs on the 866. That's the way the 866 was designed and it's not a glitch. The owner's manual clearly spells that out for all who take the time to read it. There isn't a "multiple-step process every time I want to change inputs..." as you said. You change inputs and wait until the circuitry adjusts "to the new input source and synch the app and front panel display."

Sigh. "reverted to standby and required a few on/standby/on sequences before everything synched". That is not a feature but a bug.

 

[mep]

Sigh. "reverted to standby and required a few on/standby/on sequences before everything synched". That is not a feature but a bug.

Nothing to sigh about Chuckles. I clearly stated that if the 866 went into standby mode on its own, the 866 would be defective. JVS clearly stated he came up with his own sequence when switching inputs which included putting it in standby mode which clearly shouldn't be done.