DARKO: MQA: a non-hostile takeover?

[astrotoy]

I've been intrigued by MQA, but have some of the same concerns that have been voiced in the thread.

 

So far, the best comparison I've seen is dolby B for cassettes. The goal of dolby B was to improve the sound quality (moving toward audiophile standards of the day) by a proprietary process which required both the creators of the music to license and use the dolby B encoding process and the manufacturers of the playback equipment to license and use the dolby B decoding process. The system still allowed people without the proper playback equipment to play dolby B encoded cassettes, albeit with lower sound quality, and the music creators could release their albums without using dolby B, though without the reduction in tape hiss. Ray Dolby, IIRC, started with just professional dolby A encoding and decoding, and eventually extended his technology to films and surround sound, becoming a very wealthy individual.

 

I believe that MQA is seeing streaming as the major market (as dolby saw cassettes) and if the growth in the market is anything like dolby B, the dual licensing could become reasonably lucrative.

 

Like cassettes, streaming would not have to be the only medium to have MQA successful.

 

Larry

[esldude]

The Computer Audiophile is spot on.

 

"The future of music consumption is streaming. Period."

 

I think that we will have niche markets for physical media and, for that matter, HiRez. Is there not a Moody Blues song "Don't fear the Future" or was that Reaper? Hummmm.

 

Pretty sure it was "don't Reap the Future." Then again, I don't have a hirez version and may not have heard it clearly.

[esldude]

I've been intrigued by MQA, but have some of the same concerns that have been voiced in the thread.

 

So far, the best comparison I've seen is dolby B for cassettes. The goal of dolby B was to improve the sound quality (moving toward audiophile standards of the day) by a proprietary process which required both the creators of the music to license and use the dolby B encoding process and the manufacturers of the playback equipment to license and use the dolby B decoding process. The system still allowed people without the proper playback equipment to play dolby B encoded cassettes, albeit with lower sound quality, and the music creators could release their albums without using dolby B, though without the reduction in tape hiss. Ray Dolby, IIRC, started with just professional dolby A encoding and decoding, and eventually extended his technology to films and surround sound, becoming a very wealthy individual.

 

I believe that MQA is seeing streaming as the major market (as dolby saw cassettes) and if the growth in the market is anything like dolby B, the dual licensing could become reasonably lucrative.

 

Like cassettes, streaming would not have to be the only medium to have MQA successful.

 

Larry

 

Yeah, but Dolby C was about twice as good or actually more like 4 times as good as Dolby B. It also was available on cassette recorders and playback units in cars. Let me record LPs, FM programs and play them back with better fidelity.

 

Now if MQA made as much difference between redbook and MQA as Dolby C improved raw cassette we would really be onto something. Alas I don't think it makes as much difference.

[NOMBEDES]

Pretty sure it was "don't Reap the Future." Then again, I don't have a hirez version and may not have heard it clearly.

 

. Good one!

[The Computer Audiophile]

Now if MQA made as much difference between redbook and MQA as Dolby C improved raw cassette we would really be onto something. Alas I don't think it makes as much difference.

Where have you heard MQA?

[mansr]

Yeah, but Dolby C was about twice as good or actually more like 4 times as good as Dolby B. It also was available on cassette recorders and playback units in cars. Let me record LPs, FM programs and play them back with better fidelity.

 

Now if MQA made as much difference between redbook and MQA as Dolby C improved raw cassette we would really be onto something. Alas I don't think it makes as much difference.

 

I don't think anything can make an improvement of that magnitude to high-res music. It can't get better than reality.

[Tony Lauck]

I don't think anything can make an improvement of that magnitude to high-res music. It can't get better than reality.

 

My experience, making live recordings with a Nakamichi CR-7 cassette recorder was that the best sound quality was had with Dolby switched off. One could listen through the tape hiss perfectly well, but one could not listen to the artificial sonic manipulations of Dolby processing. (The same was true with the professional Dolby A process, the introduction of which marked the end of the golden age of stereo recording, IMO.)

 

In fairness to Dolby, he did seize on something (tape hiss) that the mass market could hear and thereby was able to cash in on his "improvement". This is not the case with MQA for two reasons: first because the mass market can not hear the difference between CD quality and hi-res, and second, because the commercial benefit (cost reduction) possible by reducing bit count is insignificant, amounting to some $0.10 per album.

[tailspn]

Where have you heard MQA?

 

MQA, like all psychoacoustic dynamic level and tone control compression/expansion processes strive to cover up recording and transmission process limitations. It can be very effective in altering, and be potentially more pleasing to some/many compared to the original, or not. But as has been pointed out on this thread the cost of wedding a recording to a non standardized irreversible process, controlled and profited by one company, can have grave consequences.

 

One thing MQA is not is a new idea. It's the same snake oil repackaged and proffered many times in this business.

[Jud]

Tesla open sourced their patents. Seems to be working for them.

 

What is "open sourcing" a patent?

[jabbr]

What is "open sourcing" a patent?

 

From my very good friends: https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/CC_Public_Patent_License

 

as an example

[The Computer Audiophile]

One thing MQA is not is a new idea. It's the same snake oil repackaged and proffered many times in this business.

Two things:

 

1) Where have you heard an MQA A/B in order to put your statements into context?

 

2) Your statement about snake oil comes off as very disingenuous because you have a horse in the race.

 

 

P.S. Your favorite format DSD is often seen as, "not a new idea. It's the same snake oil repackaged and proffered many times in this business."

[tailspn]

Two things:

 

1) Where have you heard an MQA A/B in order to put your statements into context?

 

2) Your statement about snake oil comes off as very disingenuous because you have a horse in the race.

 

I've never heard it, and have no interest in hearing it. I hear live microphone feeds, and the DSD256 recording of them for a living. Anything that alters the result of that by altering the spectral or dynamic content is not a benefit to me, nor the reason I work.

 

I believe you only need look at the history of Meridian in general (DVD-A), and Stewart in particular to witness disingenuous.

 

All of course IMO.

[james45974]

I have an MQA question that I don't think I have seen brought up before, excuse me if it has.

 

If MQA wants insinuate itself in the recording process right from the beginning and if the vast majority of recordings these days are from digital masters, including vinyl, where does the MQA process fit into the analog world?

[The Computer Audiophile]

I've never heard it, and have no interest in hearing it. I hear live microphone feeds, and the DSD256 recording of them for a living. Anything that alters the result of that by altering the spectral or dynamic content of that is not a benefit to me, nor the reason I work.

 

I believe you only need look at the history of Meridian in general (DVD-A), and Stewart in particular to witness disingenuous.

 

All of course IMO.

Wow. I hope you realize how your statements make you look. Calling a competing product snake oil without ever hearing it is preposterous. Whether or not one likes the business model of MQA is another story, but your statements about the product's worth without any experience with the product are almost laughable.

[The Computer Audiophile]

I have an MQA question that I don't think I have seen brought up before, excuse me if it has.

 

If MQA wants insinuate itself in the recording process right from the beginning and if the vast majority of recordings these days are from digital masters, including vinyl, where does the MQA process fit into the analog world?

At the A to D converter.

 

Although MQA never addresses the fact that many recordings use multiple A to D converters (even in the same song). Thus, correcting for problems with A to D converters will be a challenge to say the least.

[The Computer Audiophile]

I hope people don't misunderstand my comments in this thread. In no way am I a proponent of or opponent of MQA at this point. I just want all facts to come out and get rid of one-sided rants. That's all.

[mansr]

At the A to D converter.

 

Although MQA never addresses the fact that many recordings use multiple A to D converters (even in the same song). Thus, correcting for problems with A to D converters will be a challenge to say the least.

First you have to show that there is a problem at all.

[james45974]

I hope people don't misunderstand my comments in this thread. In no way am I a proponent of or opponent of MQA at this point. I just want all facts to come out and get rid of one-sided rants. That's all.

 

Chris, it is good to attempt to get the facts out in this discussion. There seems to be very emotional responses on boths sides of the coin here (for a sense of balance and a somewhat opposite opinion of MQA check out the fanboys on the Meridin Unplugged forums)

[The Computer Audiophile]

First you have to show that there is a problem at all.

There is no such thing as a perfect A to D or any component for that matter.

[james45974]

At the A to D converter.

 

Although MQA never addresses the fact that many recordings use multiple A to D converters (even in the same song). Thus, correcting for problems with A to D converters will be a challenge to say the least.

 

Is temporal blurring not a problem with vinyl that is sourced from a digital master? Will there be MQA encoded vinyl and MQA licensed phono preamps?

[The Computer Audiophile]

Is temporal blurring not a problem with vinyl that is sourced from a digital master? Will there be MQA encoded vinyl and MQA licensed phono preamps?

I'm not following you :~)

[mansr]

There is no such thing as a perfect A to D or any component for that matter.

No, but not all imperfections are a problem.

[The Computer Audiophile]

No, but not all imperfections are a problem.

 

I hear you, but the Grammy winning recording engineers I've talked to think music reproduction on a stereo system is only a cartoon of the actual performance. I think we have a long way to go.

[duxservit]

The future of music consumption is streaming. Period. MQA sees this, as do all the record labels (they are major investors in Spotify). I don't want to take this too far off topic so I'll just say that by 2020-2025, the infrastructure won't matter. It's consumer demand that matters and virtually nobody is demanding high resolution or even lossless 16/44.1.

 

+1. This is shaping to be true.

 

Related, the IP infrastructure providers are currently looking at the impact of data/traffic coming from consumer IoT devices (e.g. sensors in your home appliances). Potentially a data deluge.

 

Audio streaming (with fixed packet sizes and predictable rates) is probably going to be dwarfed by the IoT data deluge.

[mansr]

I hear you, but the Grammy winning recording engineers I've talked to think music reproduction on a stereo system is only a cartoon of the actual performance. I think we have a long way to go.

That has much more to do with the speakers. Like that there are only two of them.