DCS Suing GoldenSound!

27 minutes ago, Currawong said:

A fan of a "team" (company, political party, etc.) isn't interested in the truth, they are only interested in what supports their "team" and/or belief system. They wont look into the details very carefully, because they aren't interested in the truth.

100% true. Based on your replies, it seems you’re on team Cameron. 

30 minutes ago, Currawong said:

For everyone else, dCS' credibility has been destroyed. 

I do give you high marks for melodrama, again. 

21 minutes ago, Currawong said:

 

There's no nuance when a company responds with a flat-out lie, as with the litigation claim. 

 

What appears to be happening is, dCS's response is intended for their fans and dealers. Just look where they said:

“On March 3rd 2024 GoldenSound then announced they had collaborated with a DAC manufacturer to create the WANDLA – Goldensound Edition DAC. This product has similar functionality to dCS digital to analogue converters.”

Without directly saying it (and directly slandering him) they are implying that something nefarious is going on. That way, fans and dealers, if asked, can just say that Cameron lied, or is conspiring with another manufacturer, even if neither are true.

 

A fan of a "team" (company, political party, etc.) isn't interested in the truth, they are only interested in what supports their "team" and/or belief system. They wont look into the details very carefully, because they aren't interested in the truth.

 

For everyone else, dCS' credibility has been destroyed. 

Exactly.  They completely lost me on the flat out lie that they had not threatened litigation.  So then we come around to the gray stuff, 3 sides, etc, and I'm certain that they are full of baloney.  The $3,200 WANDLA is a great example of gray, but all I can do is laugh at the assertion that a $3,200 DAC competes with dCS.

In some ways this pushes the same buttons as the MoFi digital step debacle.  Super high end audiophile stuff often requires a leap of faith.  It's completely irrational, kind of ridiculous to drop $30K on a DAC or $150 on a single record.  You need to put your mind in a generous emotional state to do it, that requires trust.

1 hour ago, shuppatsu said:

It'd be nice in dCS could substantiate their side of the story with something, anything.

I’m with you. It would be nice. However, it’ll never be enough for people who’ve selected a team to support. 
 

If everything Cameron said is in fact true, it doesn’t change anything I do in the big picture. I’d still write an honest review about dCS products and never once worry about getting myself into this situation.
 

Some people attract drama. It’s just part of their ethos. If you’ve ever written a review before, you’ll know that any feature can be deemed great or terrible. It all comes down to the person writing the review. In addition, anyone can make it seem incredibly innocent looking. 
 

I also don’t think the YouTube arms race is helping anyone. The more outrageous, the more money you make. Just look at the ridiculousness of the thumbnails images. 

11 minutes ago, PeterG said:

 

Exactly.  They completely lost me on the flat out lie that they had not threatened litigation.  So then we come around to the gray stuff, 3 sides, etc, and I'm certain that they are full of baloney.  The $3,200 WANDLA is a great example of gray, but all I can do is laugh at the assertion that a $3,200 DAC competes with dCS.

 

In some ways this pushes the same buttons as the MoFi digital step debacle.  Super high end audiophile stuff often requires a leap of faith.  It's completely irrational, kind of ridiculous to drop $30K on a DAC or $150 on a single record.  You need to put your mind in a generous emotional state to do it, that requires trust.

Do you think people would care so much about this if dCS sold $100 DACs out of a garage in Harlem? Honest question. 

1 hour ago, shuppatsu said:

Well, we know that dCS lied, because they threatened litigation in no uncertain terms and then denied threatening litigation.

Would you please share an exact quote showing that they “threatened litigation”?  Did they (dCS) literally do this?  

9 minutes ago, PeterG said:

 

No, and that is exactly the point of my second paragraph.  dCS (like MoFi, Wilson, Magico, Ferrari, Rolex...) needs to be trusted much more than low end or mid-tier products.  So this behavior is way off-brand.  That's why it reminds me of MoFi.

 

 

Ah, understood. Now I see where you’re coming from. 
 

Part of the reason I think there is a story behind the story, is that this is so far off brand for dCS. In its 30 years I don’t know of a single incident like this involving them. Usually there is a track record, like Monster Cable. In addition, I know of countless incidents of dCS being the total opposite from that shown in the video. 

7 minutes ago, PeterG said:

needs to be trusted much more

That trust is earned by how well they have treated their customers.  That dCS went after some guy on the internet isn’t going to sway most folks - especially those who might be serious about finding an excellent product in their price range.  
 

dCS has a long history of earring positive reviews by professional reviewers.  I think many folks are going to conclude that something must have been seriously amiss for this one review to turn out negative.  

16 minutes ago, shuppatsu said:

It's literally in the thread already. But here you go, from the lawyer's cease and desist:

 

 

It should be beyond obvious that this is a threat of litigation. But just so you know, "special damages" and "punitive damages" are terms of art that apply only to litigation and administrative actions. And seeing as dCS is not the government, it's crystal clear that this is threat to sue GoldenSound.

Is that from the letter sent in May 2024 from the dCS legal rep, or another letter or email?

29 minutes ago, shuppatsu said:

It's literally in the thread already. But here you go, from the lawyer's cease and desist:

This thread is titled “DCS Suing GoldenSound” and it’s a false statement.  What I am trying to get to is exactly who said what because that’s the only way to determine if dCS was lying as has been claimed.  From what you just shared, it was dCS’s attorney who threatened legal action.  Is there anything directly from dCS themselves where they threatened this?  It absolutely matters who said what.

Just now, kennyb123 said:

This thread is titled “DCS Suing GoldenSound” and it’s a false statement.  What I am trying to get to is exactly who said what because that’s the only way to determine if dCS is lying as has been claimed.  From what you just shared, it is dCS’s attorney who threatened legal action.  Is there anything directly from dCS themselves where they threatened this?  It absolutely matters who said what.

Nuance, details, and stories behind the stories. 
 

Anyone who has ever been involved in something even remotely similar to this, knows there’s more to the story. 

Just now, The Computer Audiophile said:

Nuance, details, and stories behind the stories. 
 

Anyone who has ever been involved in something even remotely similar to this, knows there’s more to the story. 

Absolutely right.  Interesting that some who are seemingly most bothered by dCS’ apparent lies aren’t being more careful with their own statements.  

9 hours ago, ecwl said:

Obviously, providing PGGB'd music for free to paying Patreon subscribers is wrong. Especially when PGGB author provides music for free for people to test. Although I don't see that as something he listed as a Patreon service. So I'll trust your sources on this. 

 

With respect to "publicly releasing a reverse engineered headphone filter designed by Mitch Barnett", I ended up doing some searches and reading on this. While I 100% agree with you that it was a highly problematic and inappropriate move, I think in this situation context matters. And unfortunately, on Head-Fi, some of the original posts were removed so I can only re-construct what happened based on some guesses. My understanding was that GoldenSound was saying that given a convolution filter, you can usually create an equivalent set of parametric EQs to mimick the convolution filter. And then somebody said they tried to do that with Mitch's filter and it didn't sound the same. So GoldenSound took Mitch's filter and created an equivalent set of parametric EQs and posted it online.

 

Like I said, I 100% agree with you that I don't think GoldenSound should have done that. However, if I want to prove the equivalency (or closeness) of a set of parametric EQs vs a convolution filter, and I just randomly generate a convolution filter with an equivalent parametric EQ, nobody is going to try it and people are going to argue that my example is very specific and I won't be able to do that with Mitch's convolution filter. So ultimately, GoldenSound had to" reverse engineer" a convolution filter people would actually use as demonstration.

 

Hence, my take on it is that I don't have a problem with him "reverse engineering a headphone filter designed by Mitch Barnett". After all, I think we have discussed this before about HQPlayer and PGGB vs Chord WTA filters that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. I do think that GoldenSound could have just privately sent the set of parametric EQ settings to the individuals who owned/purchased Mitch's convolution filter and let them compare themselves.

 

Of course, if I am mistaken in my understanding of the situation, please enlighten me further.

Think Mitch has directly responded here and he clearly didn’t like what went down. I didn’t see Golden refute the paragraph about PGGB either. Both of these seem to be cases where the manufacturer had provided free review samples and think there is a misuse of their product and goodwill.
 

Taken at face value I am astonished that any reviewer would allow a situation to reach a stage where more than one manufacturer believes or publicly claims that they have faced pirated or plagiarism in any way. At the least there is poor relationship management going on here. In that light this statement may look different:

“On March 3rd 2024 GoldenSound then announced they had collaborated with a DAC manufacturer to create the WANDLA – Goldensound Edition DAC. This product has similar functionality to dCS digital to analogue converters.”

As @The Computer Audiophile says, there are three sides to the truth. I’m sure some of this may be free use and some of this may not. Unfortunately that’s normally when lawyers come in to sort things out. 

3 hours ago, shuppatsu said:

Well, we know that dCS lied, because they threatened litigation in no uncertain terms and then denied threatening litigation. Whether Cameron and Lissimore lied about the conversation never taking place is not currently known. But so far they have not been caught out in a lie and have been producing receipts left and right. It'd be nice in dCS could substantiate their side of the story with something, anything.

We do not. We only know what each side has said, and both are different.

Just now, shuppatsu said:

Respectfully, this is not true. We have Mr. Rees's email, which clearly threatens litigation. We have David Steven's response, where he admits that Mr. Rees sent the email as their representative. He claims that it was not a threat of litigation because "the word litigation was not used in the correspondence." This is a laughable, spurious claim. The letter states that they will seek to recover normal, special, and punitive damages. These are terms of art that can only mean litigation in this context.

You can yell this out till you're blue in the face and it still wont matter. We still don't know who is, and who is not, lying. By accepting that letter as truth you're making an assumption that it is GoldenSounds who is telling you the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

And lastly, this is exactly the kind of dispute between two parties a court can sort out...  Have fun

Just now, shuppatsu said:

Are you suggesting that Cameron/HP fabricated the letter? Because that truly would be grounds for litigation. Mind you, dCS has already issued its "final" response where Steven acknowledged that the demand letter existed. It beggars belief that the response would not call attention the supposed fabrication.

nope, I am suggesting we dont know the truth no matter how many times you say we do.