Jump to content
IGNORED

MQA at CES


Recommended Posts

Meridian must have gotten hammered over how confusing their message was and in response tightened up their certification requirements.

 

At this point of the farce there has to be a Monty Python reference in here somewhere, Meridian being a British company, but my MP is rusty, anyone else want to have a shot at it?

Jim

Link to comment
Didn't Meridian have advertisements showing Auralic as one of its partners ? I swear I saw this online somewhere or maybe in a magazine . I could be wrong .

 

Of course I was tough on Auralic because we kept getting delay after delay it seemed on the iPhone app .

 

So you are telling me that Auralic had the MQA decoding in their upcoming firmware update without Meridian's approval ? Hmmm . I find that hard to believe .

 

Yes there was such a banner photo in the Stereophile Marketing/News blurb about MQA at the beginning of CES. I posted a question on another thread which I will re-ask here because of the higher traffic on this thread:

 

Is there any significance to the lack of fellow British audio companies listed on the banner? No Linn, Rega, Naim, KEF, etc?

Jim

Link to comment

 

The confusion is that MQA has now realized that providing manufacturers like Auralic with generic software decoding (unlike Mytelk's dac-based one) doesn't yet include settings for targeted normal dacs.

 

This is pretty amateurish on Meridian/MQA part, seems like there hasn't been any beta or even alpha testing before the marketing people opened their mouth! Makes the measured rollout that Roon is doing look simply brilliant!

Jim

Link to comment
I believe it's a bit more sinister than that... How could they, or Auralic, have not tested this... Impossible.

 

Is Roon rolling out MQA? Or is the rollout botched by this turn on Meridian's part?

 

No, I did not mean to infer Roon is doing MQA, I have not idea if they are, I simply was comparing the way they are rolling out their product versus the way MQA is handling theirs.

Jim

Link to comment

Can someone clear up a little confusion (?) on my part about MQA. Is there just a one size fits all file or are there different MQA files for each different resolution. For example, Tea for the Tillerman can be had at 64 & 128 DSD, & 192/24, does that mean there will be 3 different MQA files?

Jim

Link to comment
THANK YOU for your oasis of sanity in an ocean of negativity -and even paranoia- displayed so far in this thread. Let's see what decoded MQA actually sounds like before everybody brings out the long knives...

 

I agree that some of the comments are bordering on ridiculousness but the fact that this seems to be spinning out of control can be laid directly at Meridians feet, they are doing nothing that I can see to quell any rampant speculation. They are shooting themselves in the foot big time!

Jim

Link to comment
OK, Jim. Meridian announced this at CES 2015 and hasn't delivered. I'm unhappy that they sold me a "MQA-ready" DAC last spring that still can't decode the music now available. But their missteps don't justify all of the techno-gibberish such as "Any format or codec based on PCM can't be better than PCM. We start testing PCM again?" seen here to discredit the entire project before anyone has listened to any benefit, or not, to music reproduction. I'm a Computer Audiophile, all about the music and curious what this credible company is up to, not an enraged defender of the status quo.

 

The fact that this was announced a year ago and they still are not allowing direct A-B comparisons makes me think the emperor has no clothes!

Jim

Link to comment
Not sure if I understand your question, and DSD is not part of MQA.

 

The coded MQA can either be 16 or 24 bit, (and 32 also seems as an option), these can then have either 44.1 or 48 before decompressing.

 

Unless you are told up front what resolution the original master was, those possible 6 combinations can unpacked to n combinations where n is one of these numbers: 1,2,4,8. (Multiplied with either 44.1 or 48). Depending of the master of cause.

 

To bring size into this may confuses more, as a file can have any size.

 

There can only exist one MQA originated from the master recording. But the record company seems to be allowed to decide how to deliver in either 24 or 16 bit. if the original was 16, so in theory you could generate more than one MQA file. (My understanding).

 

When it comes to decode and what is allowed, the communication from MQA is non existing at the moment to other companies.

 

A lower sampling frequenzy out to the DAC would mean less size, but then again I think size do not matter in this discussion.

 

Did I in some way answer your question ?

 

Yes, somewhat. I only brought up DSD because currently you can get music files at different resolutions. I guess a follow up question, more of a broad question that probably can't be answered yet: will the highest resolution of a file be part of the deal or will the resolution be a mystery. I can't imagine it would be a mystery but it gets me wondering if MQA will be labeled such as "MQA 96", "MQA 192", "MQA 384", etc.

Jim

Link to comment
Well Bluetooth can't be used, nor AirPlay, or ?

Do we lack technology for hi res wireless streaming (to headphones), or is WiFi OK ?

 

The gist of my thought is this: will Apple consider MQA in a similar light as they do FLAC? Apple as a company seems anathema to using other peoples technology.

Jim

Link to comment

I am dual posting some questions here and in the Tidal MQA thread. Since MQA can have different underlying resolutions how are you going to know what you are getting from the store or streamer? Your DAC can have resolution limits that will be the ultimate determination of the resolution quality you are playing but will MQA label whether the file is simply redbook or the higher resolution quality of the file? Or is all MQA product going to be mastered at some super high resolution?

Jim

Link to comment
Sure!

 

 

 

Me too, maybe if there will be some cheap enough MQA DAC, I'll buy it for that purpose just out of curiosity... :)

 

Connecting XMOS's USB audio development kit's I2S input to the DAC pins is not too hard.

 

You guys are too funny! All I can picture is someone at MQA/Meridian running around like a chicken with its head cut off "We can't have the public analyzing our technology, we have to do some more development, re-announce a 'new and improved MQA' at CES 2017" :)

Jim

Link to comment

I have not read the paper that is being circulated regarding the "science" behind MQA but can someone answer a question about it: Did the paper go through a standard peer review? Also, as a good practice (advertising dollars notwithstanding) I would think that before the magazine types got on the bandwagon they would have done a more serious study. It seem to me like they are just believing and writing whatever MQA/Meridian tells or auditions for them.

Jim

Link to comment
On a different note I read most of this whole thread and the negative comments are alarming. We should be happy that "better" is coming and this time around it may actually stick. For the naysayers I know you have heard this all before with several failed formats since CD but maybe just maybe this is the one that will work.

 

I think that some of the critical (disparaging) comments are a result of the very little or no critical (analytical or explanatory) effort being put forth or allowed by Meridian. Maybe if there wasn't a feeling of being sold a bill of goods at the moment there might be more of a constructive discussion of the merits/drawbacks of MQA.

Jim

Link to comment
This paper won an AES award for submitted peer reviewed papers in 2014. However peer review as done in these AES papers may not be what you have in mind when papers are published in some other journals.

 

Thanks for the answer. My thought on peer review, coming from someone in the construction industry where we don't do official peer review, is whether it was reviewed for accuracy, efficacy, was the "experiment" duplicated under controlled conditions, etc. Probably not what to expect from a paper submitted to the AES!

Jim

Link to comment

 

In the long run MQA can of course succeed, if it reaches critical mass and new material is exclusively released on MQA. While it's certainly a big strategic upside for Meridian, that's not necessarily so for Tidal. Tidal is the one gambling here. To minimize the risk, the smart thing would of course be to offer FLAC streaming in parallel, and then progressively track the MQA uptake, or differentiate by price. Errors have been made before, and the digital online landscape is riddled with corpses.

 

It seems to me that with the examples mentioned of Dolby and THX the critical mass came about by default because they were included in the mass market products. I guess if MQA gains traction in the mass market then it has potential to succeed. The audiophile market is a different animal, more skepticism means, I would assume, a harder market to penetrate.

Jim

Link to comment
Hi guys - The Ask Bob Stuart Anything About MQA thread will likely close this week. I encourage you all to ask whatever questions you may have.

 

I'm actually surprised that so many of you have been speculating and running your own tests, but are not asking questions to one of the only people who could answer or even respond to your questions or ideas.

 

Miska, I'm looking at you :~)

 

How about you, Chris, have any questions on your mind?

Jim

Link to comment
BTW... The listening chair in your avatar looks as comfortable as Bob Stuart answering the questions Chris will send him...

 

I have sat in a reproduction, surprisingly comfortable, if only for short listening sessions. Designed in 1917 by Dutch architect Gerrit Rietveld. The experience is not unlike an Adirondack chair.

Jim

Link to comment
There's a thought. I'll probably just wait to trade in the Sophias until some MQA-approved headphones are available. (By that time I'll probably have figured out why all my gear needs to be good up to 45kHz when I can't hear anything over 16kHz on a good day.)

 

--David

 

Well, you should look at some of the reviews of super tweeters. I have never heard one but they apparently do make a difference.

Jim

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...