Jump to content
IGNORED

DARKO: MQA: a non-hostile takeover?


Recommended Posts

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.

 

I think tailspn is a bit over the top with his proclamations. Then again in fairness to him. How in the heck is he supposed to have heard it? One of the big sticky wickets to me is how they have avoided simply letting people hear MQA vs no MQA. They have muddied the waters on that at every demonstration.

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment
I'm not following you :~)

 

Sorry Chris, let me try again! As I understand, MQA contends that digital problems start at the very beginning of the recording process. If a digital master made through the MQA system is then D-A converted to cut a vinyl master where does the MQA end? In essence, will the vinyl stamping master have remnants of MQA? Will all vinyl mastering now have to be on board with MQA to properly prepare an analog recording from an MQA recorded digital master?

Jim

Link to comment
There's surely a hierarchy of what matters, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't pursue perfection in all areas.

 

Yes and no. In a world of finite resources wisdom in where to pursue improvements is better than pursuing perfection in all areas beyond reason.

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment
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.

 

Having participated in a number of web based standardization efforts, I make it a point to avoid all media formats that are closed and for which I can't select my storage, and player of choice. SACD: I buy and will continue to buy as long as I can rip to disc. Blue-Ray: even though I can technically rip, I avoid because of closed nature. I don't use any proprietary web formats. I don't care if it sounds better (in the short term) because in the long term it will be worse.

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

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

 

as an example

 

Thanks. I didn't understand the terminology, since patents are open source in somewhat the same way open source software is. (Think about it. You can assuredly still sue for violation of various open source licenses, and numerous suits have been filed.) One profound difference is the degree of disclosure, tiptoeing around the point being something of an art in the patent world, while source code is (I assume, not being a programmer) pretty revelatory.

 

Tesla went with the strategy of abandoning patents after they were assured they had nothing to fear from the companies they thought would be their important competition (see Tesla's 2014 announcement), while the folks holding the MQA patents have no such assurance.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Jud to avoid confusion we aren't taking about up sampling here but native Highres streaming.

 

Actually, up sampling and transcoding are something that we are talking about. Even in fact, with MQA, though that particular varietal is called "unfolding." It still results in a music stream at different sample rates/quality levels. :)

 

Also, I really think the distinction between native DSD and a transcoded/upsampled DSD is trivial. So summarily dismissing up sampling and such as of no interest locks one out of much better sound at minimal cost. If you listen to the same mastering, the playback format makes all the difference. Again, YMMV. :)

 

-Paul

Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Link to comment
There's surely a hierarchy of what matters, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't pursue perfection in all areas.

 

The Internet (and Web) would not exist as we know it but for the fact that it is largely open. What a shame that would have been. Since I have finite resources I choose to allocate them in a way that is likely to work out on a long term basis.

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment
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.

 

My own understanding of this is that the input to the ADC is "only a cartoon of the actual performance." In other words, the major degradation occurs right at the acoustic - electrical interface. Much of the recording engiineer's art is in presenting a believable facsimile of the live performance to the recording medium.

 

(Thank you for the pointer to your article about Apple.)

"People hear what they see." - Doris Day

The forum would be a much better place if everyone were less convinced of how right they were.

Link to comment
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.

 

Competing product? I make surround recordings with the goal of transporting the spatial experience of live acoustic music to a different time and place. What are you talking about?

Link to comment
The Internet (and Web) would not exist as we know it but for the fact that it is largely open. What a shame that would have been. Since I have finite resources I choose to allocate them in a way that is likely to work out on a long term basis.

 

Yes and no. In a world of finite resources wisdom in where to pursue improvements is better than pursuing perfection in all areas beyond reason.

I disagree because your arguments presuppose that everything works in a linear fashion. What I'm saying is this, if Bob Stuart is a digital specialist, he can work on the digital side while Andrew Jones works on improving loudspeakers.

 

If it were a single organization with a single checkbook, I'd be totally on board with you guys.

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment
I disagree because your arguments presuppose that everything works in a linear fashion. What I'm saying is this, if Bob Stuart is a digital specialist, he can work on the digital side while Andrew Jones works on improving loudspeakers.

 

If it were a single organization with a single checkbook, I'd be totally on board with you guys.

 

I get that part. But on the back end the consumer has a single checkbook. Do I spend a bit on this MQA enabled device to stream down MQA (I already have a pretty good DAC anyway) or would money on speakers make conventional digital audio sound better than MQA on my old speakers? Just as a hypothetical.

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment
Competing product? I make surround recordings with the goal of transporting the spatial experience of live acoustic music to a different time and place. What are you talking about?

Absolutely a competing product. You make and sell recordings. If MQA is the best thing since sliced bread (I'm not saying it is) and everyone flocks to it and says it sounds better than your recordings, you are SOL, especially because you painted yourself in the anti-MQA corner.

 

People allocating limited funds on MQA releases will not spend as much on your releases. Period. You're competing for the same dollars.

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment
I get that part. But on the back end the consumer has a single checkbook. Do I spend a bit on this MQA enabled device to stream down MQA (I already have a pretty good DAC anyway) or would money on speakers make conventional digital audio sound better than MQA on my old speakers? Just as a hypothetical.

Very good question, and one that everyone should consider rather than jumping on a new format bandwagon without having experienced it.

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment
I disagree because your arguments presuppose that everything works in a linear fashion. What I'm saying is this, if Bob Stuart is a digital specialist, he can work on the digital side while Andrew Jones works on improving loudspeakers.

 

If it were a single organization with a single checkbook, I'd be totally on board with you guys.

 

No hardly linear. A successful organizing principle of both the IETF and W3C is that the data (transmission) format be open and commercial entities compete on production and rendering.

 

In any case I have 1gbe fiber to my house and wireless standards are catching up so I don't foresee a bandwidth limited future.

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment
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.

 

This is the kind of stuff that excites me to be honest - the fact that as good as HiFI in the home can sound now, that the recording engineers think there's still a lot more improvement possible. Are they talking about stereo systems for the home sounding cartoonish (relative to the actual performance), or even the stereo production in the studio on their main monitors also?

Link to comment
Absolutely a competing product. You make and sell recordings.

 

Chris, you have no clue what I do. I do not sell my recordings, and do not compete for customer dollars. My interest is to take the analog signal from the appropriate microphones for the session, and record them without a perceivable difference between the microphone feed, and the recorded DSD bitstreams. The entire object is transparency. I have met my goal if there is no difference between the mixed feed, and the playout result. Further manipulation of that take would only reduce the achieved transparency.

 

Separately from my goals is the concept of corralling the product of an entire music production industry with a proprietary technology administered by a private company; especially one with the track record of attempting to monopolize a delivery system in the past. One fortunately that died on the vine.

Link to comment
the concept of corralling the product of an entire music production industry with a proprietary technology administered by a private company; especially one with the track record of attempting to monopolize a delivery system in the past. One fortunately that died on the vine.

 

Which makes me think rumors of the death of non-MQA music are greatly exaggerated. It's kind of like dire warnings that Fiat is about to monopolize the world auto industry.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
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.

 

Considering how bad some of these Grammy nominated recordings sound, I am not sure this is an endorsement. I guess it depends on exactly who you are referring to. Without knowing that, your statement doesn't carry much weight.

Main System: [Synology DS216, Rpi-4b LMS (pCP)], Holo Audio Red, Ayre QX-5 Twenty, Ayre KX-5 Twenty, Ayre VX-5 Twenty, Revel Ultima Studio2, Iconoclast speaker cables & interconnects, RealTraps acoustic treatments

Living Room: Sonore ultraRendu, Ayre QB-9DSD, Simaudio MOON 340iX, B&W 802 Diamond

Link to comment
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.

 

I agree with your understanding if the objective is to provide the illusion of actually being at an acoustic music performance, or as close as possible. That that reproduction requires more than two channels, and the currently available 5.0 or 5.1 channels is but a step forward. But a giant step!

 

If on the other hand, the objective is to optimize stereo performance of studio processed music, a creative art form in itself, then we've reached a point of diminishing returns. The available Digital Audio Workstations today, coupled with the current delivery systems are a very far cry from just 20 years ago. Any/every concievable effect is easily created today with a much less investment in hardware and software.

 

But if the choke point is the software delivery system, and that fantasy can be sold, then the likes of MQA have a chance. But I'd be inclined to doubt it.

Link to comment
Which makes me think rumors of the death of non-MQA music are greatly exaggerated. It's kind of like dire warnings that Fiat is about to monopolize the world auto industry.

 

For some reason of late CA has been inundated with too many "end of" threads. Doom and gloom or even glory that will never be surpassed. None of it really bothered me all that much. But FIAT monopolizing the world auto industry????? Don't even want to consider the remote possibility. Don't be a Debbie Downer Jud. I know, I know Fiat is so unlikely to manage this, probably less likely than MQA taking over, but the consequences would be so dire. We'll end up with self driving cars that never get us to our destination and will have no choice other than to ring up another Fiat ride on our cell phone. Roll the dice one more time to see if our desired destination can be reached.

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment
This is the kind of stuff that excites me to be honest - the fact that as good as HiFI in the home can sound now, that the recording engineers think there's still a lot more improvement possible. Are they talking about stereo systems for the home sounding cartoonish (relative to the actual performance), or even the stereo production in the studio on their main monitors also?

Yes, high end stereos sounding cartoonish. The best of the best with respect to HiFi products.

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment
Chris, you have no clue what I do. I do not sell my recordings, and do not compete for customer dollars. My interest is to take the analog signal from the appropriate microphones for the session, and record them without a perceivable difference between the microphone feed, and the recorded DSD bitstreams. The entire object is transparency. I have met my goal if there is no difference between the mixed feed, and the playout result. Further manipulation of that take would only reduce the achieved transparency.

 

Separately from my goals is the concept of corralling the product of an entire music production industry with a proprietary technology administered by a private company; especially one with the track record of attempting to monopolize a delivery system in the past. One fortunately that died on the vine.

What do you do with your recordings, keep them for private listening? I was under the impression that Native DSD was your site - https://www.nativedsd.com/

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

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...