MQA is Vaporware

[Archimago]

4 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Those who talked about it as the greatest thing ever, will create a market for old mQa products and pirated recordings and endlessly talk about how great it was during the salad days of mQa. 

 

That would be hilarious if it's the case!

 

Would be equivalent to nostalgic HDCD audiophiles swapping encoded content and selling HDCD-decoding CD-players! Is there such a subgroup out there!?

[JoeWhip]

There is a subgroup for everything in this hobby.

[rickca]

21 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Those who talked about it as the greatest thing ever, will create a market for old mQa products and pirated recordings and endlessly talk about how great it was during the salad days of mQa. 

Wonderful irony if MQA files become pirated.

[charlesphoto]

21 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Those who talked about it as the greatest thing ever, will create a market for old mQa products and pirated recordings and endlessly talk about how great it was during the salad days of mQa. 

Dusty Topping DACs stacked on top of even dustier Betamax and Laser disc players. 

[Thuaveta]

On 9/1/2023 at 7:33 AM, Fx Studio said:

Unless you were expecting Scotscakovich on the left channel and Madonna on the right or course

 

Scotchtakovich only ever sounds right on the original 3M tape.

[manisandher]

20 hours ago, Archimago said:

Would be equivalent to nostalgic HDCD audiophiles swapping encoded content and selling HDCD-decoding CD-players!

 

I don't think MQA is in any way equivalent to HDCD.

 

Yes, HDCD itself became obsolete pretty soon after it was released, but there is a genuine reason for pursuing HDCD-encoded content, even today - the Pacific Microsonics Model One and Two.

 

There is no reason whatsoever to pursue any MQA-encoded content.

 

Mani.

[loop7]

7 hours ago, rickca said:

Wonderful irony if MQA files become pirated.

The term Irony is so often incorrectly used but you definitely nailed it. MQA files could become such a fetish that passion will motivate piracy.

[Currawong]

On 9/2/2023 at 3:41 PM, FredericV said:

Wasting any more time on this troll is pointless. The shelf life of MQA has expired.

A friend of mine, an expert in a particular field, has run discussion groups for what amounts now to about a couple of decades. As the field is controversial, he gets a lot of ignorant people trying to prove him wrong. Instead of getting angry, he just uses their arguments as an excuse to write detailed, comprehensive rebuttals to their arguments, which then adds to his body of writings. His writings are now so extensive, and his reputation so well known, that people pretty much have stopped arguing with him. 

What I learned from that is, if you know what you're talking about, what may seem like troublesome people can be a blessing in disguise.  

[Skirmash]

8 hours ago, Currawong said:

A friend of mine, an expert in a particular field, has run discussion groups for what amounts now to about a couple of decades. As the field is controversial, he gets a lot of ignorant people trying to prove him wrong. Instead of getting angry, he just uses their arguments as an excuse to write detailed, comprehensive rebuttals to their arguments, which then adds to his body of writings. His writings are now so extensive, and his reputation so well known, that people pretty much have stopped arguing with him. 

What I learned from that is, if you know what you're talking about, what may seem like troublesome people can be a blessing in disguise.  

Interesting story and good perspective. I have tended to think the trolls do more damage than good to their cause. I do wish from time to time someone would turn up and legitimately try to defend it - but with an open mind - because I think watching an honest, non-ego-driven, back and forth would probably help me understand the subject matter more.

When I first heard about MQA in the early days, I actually thought the concept sounded clever. Burying additional resolution under the achievable noise floor is a summary of my understanding back then. I could not say when my opinion turned, but once I understood using MQA made leveraging room-correction (which had become compelling to me) way more of a challenge, then for me it became imperative to understand the tradeoffs that MQA was forcing upon the consumer.

 

The combination of very smart people here starting to put together summaries that I could at least (partially) understand and the reluctance of Stereophile  'leadership' to apply their 'famed' methodical approach to MQA spoke loud and clear to me. For me personally, RMAF 2018 was the proverbial nail in the coffin; the intellectual dishonesty was laid bare for all to see.

Maybe this email is an indulgence, but I just want to extend gratitude to everyone here who sunk hours of effort into exposing MQA for the fraud it is, and Chris, special thanks for fronting up at RMAF.

 

I remember the battles here about objectivism vs subjectivism, and while I had many reservations about the decisions you took at the time to stop the endless bickering, for me, that RMAF presentation and the response it garnered shows you have have firmly planted your feet in both camps right where it matters. Your experience is your own, but don't make fraudulent claims that negatively impact every audio consumer if you cannot back it up!

Thanks,

 

Ash

 

[firedog]

1 hour ago, Skirmash said:

Interesting story and good perspective. I have tended to think the trolls do more damage than good to their cause. I do wish from time to time someone would turn up and legitimately try to defend it - but with an open mind - because I think watching an honest, non-ego-driven, back and forth would probably help me understand the subject matter more.

When I first heard about MQA in the early days, I actually thought the concept sounded clever. Burying additional resolution under the achievable noise floor is a summary of my understanding back then. I could not say when my opinion turned, but once I understood using MQA made leveraging room-correction (which had become compelling to me) way more of a challenge, then for me it became imperative to understand the tradeoffs that MQA was forcing upon the consumer.

 

The combination of very smart people here starting to put together summaries that I could at least (partially) understand and the reluctance of Stereophile  'leadership' to apply their 'famed' methodical approach to MQA spoke loud and clear to me. For me personally, RMAF 2018 was the proverbial nail in the coffin; the intellectual dishonesty was laid bare for all to see.

Maybe this email is an indulgence, but I just want to extend gratitude to everyone here who sunk hours of effort into exposing MQA for the fraud it is, and Chris, special thanks for fronting up at RMAF.

 

I remember the battles here about objectivism vs subjectivism, and while I had many reservations about the decisions you took at the time to stop the endless bickering, for me, that RMAF presentation and the response it garnered shows you have have firmly planted your feet in both camps right where it matters. Your experience is your own, but don't make fraudulent claims that negatively impact every audio consumer if you cannot back it up!

Thanks,

 

Ash

 

 

MQA's problem was that they thought they had to sell themselves as something revolutionary and better than anything else to succeed. So they made claims about their product that weren't true: 

1. Lossless

2. Authenticated and all they said that meant - basically all a lie

3. Individual filters made for each DAC and ADC

4. Clearly sounds better than any other version

 

If they had said from the get go: "We have this really clever compression system. It results in only a small amount of lossiness - in frequencies with little musical information. It's for hi-res streaming: it saves a bit of bandwidth and is "perceptually lossless" - some people may even prefer it to the original on some recordings. Try it, you might like it."

 

Then  everyone would have accepted it and welcomed it as a reasonable alternative. 

 

 

[KeenObserver]

The shills and trolls played an important part in exposing MQA. They provided the counterpoint.

I don't think anyone added more to the downfall of MQA than Lee Scoggins. His ceaseless repetition of BS MQA talking points made it abundantly clear that there was no substance to MQA, only BS talking points.

Archimago and others confirmed this by methodically analyzing MQA and posting their findings.

RMAF 2018 exposed the ethical standards of the MQA crew.

The music consumer dodged a bullet with MQA.

Let's hope we can shovel dirt over MQA soon.

[charlesphoto]

@firedog Yep, hubris will always get you in the end. 

[bogi]

Comical thing for me is:

 

The MQA representatives and supporters wanted to teach us what we should hear and told us that their MQA content sounds better than lossless content because bla bla bla (end to end process approved by artists ...).

 

Then the other (for me extreme) part of pro audio scene is telling us what we cannot hear. Upsampling in software player is for nothing, we cannot hear a difference between well measuring devices etc.

 

Common for both pro camps is that they are presenting themselves as special experts, who know everything about sound and they are telling us, uneducated crowd, what is technical truth.

 

These 2 worlds should have to be antagonistic, if things wouldn't be purely business driven. Under 'normal' circumstances anybody who presented MQA unconfirmed claims about sound as facts, would have to be banned on ASR - like they banned many unknown and 'unimportant' people, who claimed something about sound. Upsampling done by MQA software renderer and crazy filters as part of n-th unfold went into allowed category. Amir closed 2 MQA threads when discussion turned against MQA.

 

These 2 camps, MQA fake promisers and flat Earth type of audio inquisitors, are supporting themselves, because of they are both from pro audio world. We ordinary non pro people are taken by both these camps as something what should not chime into pro world of their truth - we are here to listen what they are telling and to order/buy audio services/products they are providing. Economic model - what they have common - is more important than standings about sound they are presenting to consumers. The same can be said also about 'pro' audio related portals formerly propagating MQA as launch of new epoch in audio history.

 

When I ask myself what good was MQA for, one of the answers is: It disclosed or unmasked more than anything before what does it mean 'pro audio' world.

[Rt66indierock]

On 9/2/2023 at 4:15 PM, Archimago said:

 

That would be hilarious if it's the case!

 

Would be equivalent to nostalgic HDCD audiophiles swapping encoded content and selling HDCD-decoding CD-players! Is there such a subgroup out there!?

 

Arch,

A rational audiophile would download a Foobar2000 HDCD plugin and enjoy some of the Beach Boys and Grateful Dead files in the format.

Stephen

[JoeWhip]

Or those old Reference Recordings!

[manisandher]

8 hours ago, JoeWhip said:

Or those old Reference Recordings!

 

Their 24/176.4 files (so-called HRx), some dating back to 1996, are also superb-sounding. Recorded onto tape and then transferred to digital using a PM ADC. Available on Qobuz.

 

Mani.

[botrytis]

Just like anything else, it has become tribal warfare or religion. People do not want to hear anything against what they feel is their truth. 

 

Cheers from France!

 

A nice beach pic...

 

 

[JoeWhip]

4 hours ago, manisandher said:

 

Their 24/176.4 files (so-called HRx), some dating back to 1996, are also superb-sounding. Recorded onto tape and then transferred to digital using a PM ADC. Available on Qobuz.

 

Mani.

I have quite a few of them too.

[StephenJK]

On 9/4/2023 at 11:16 AM, firedog said:

 

MQA's problem was that they thought they had to sell themselves as something revolutionary and better than anything else to succeed. So they made claims about their product that weren't true: 

1. Lossless

2. Authenticated and all they said that meant - basically all a lie

3. Individual filters made for each DAC and ADC

4. Clearly sounds better than any other version

 

If they had said from the get go: "We have this really clever compression system. It results in only a small amount of lossiness - in frequencies with little musical information. It's for hi-res streaming: it saves a bit of bandwidth and is "perceptually lossless" - some people may even prefer it to the original on some recordings. Try it, you might like it."

 

Then  everyone would have accepted it and welcomed it as a reasonable alternative. 

 

 

That's how I recall it as well, but I seem to remember a singular focus on compression, and how that would allow people to download/stream music on networks that didn't support high resolution at the time. 

 

It was shortly after that that they did, and MQA seemed to be a solution to a problem that no longer existed.  I do understand that not everybody has a high speed connection, but enough of us now do that I don't think any potential service is much concerned anymore.  

 

I remember a friend building a new home in 2001-ish and paying an extra $3K to have internet cable dropped to a jack in every room of the home.  It was a few months after that you could buy a wireless router for a few hundred dollars, 

 

I bought a home in 2018 that was built in 1963.  Doing renovations I've pulled out huge amounts of coax and phone cable.  It's all obsolete and serves no purpose.  

 

All we need now is that wireless electricity, and we're all set.  

 

 

[Jud]

2 hours ago, StephenJK said:

I seem to remember a singular focus on compression, and how that would allow people to download/stream music on networks that didn't support high resolution at the time. 

 

It was shortly after that that they did, and MQA seemed to be a solution to a problem that no longer existed.  I do understand that not everybody has a high speed connection, but enough of us now do that I don't think any potential service is much concerned anymore.

 

Even for people who have that concern, plain old FLAC and ALAC compress as well or better and are lossless. The only reason for the lossy compression was to try to preserve their intellectual property, i.e., keep everyone from being able to "decode" MQA.

[charlesphoto]

@StephenJK Funny, we just bought a house built in 1987 that has literally hundreds of feet of cheap speaker cable run everywhere, inside and outside. Slowly but surely losing it all. 

[JoeWhip]

Old school here. When doing a major remodel, wired several rooms for Ethernet, including the equipment closet in the HT room.  Glad I did streaming 4K content.

[James lee]

A quick 2 paragraph history of mqa by sououndiiz

https://soundiiz.com/blog/the-history-of-tidal/?fbclid=IwAR1y5I9A0gc9dalnUHJWKLabUMJF_sgf2pEVVFuliRPqLjhYhnAcTbwEKcQ

 

"

Audio quality

In 2017, by forming a partnership with Master Quality Authenticated (MQA), TIDAL claims to offer unrivaled audio quality not found in any of its competitors. The listening experience is optimal and aims at the audiophile segment. The reality will contrast, with some musicians claiming, for example, that the advertised quality is not HD. 

In April 2022, MQA, TIDAL’s HD audio format, went bankrupt. TIDAL then almost immediately announced that the FLAC format would be available on its app, enabling millions of songs to be listened to in high definition.

"

 

[John Dyson]

12 hours ago, Jud said:

 

Even for people who have that concern, plain old FLAC and ALAC compress as well or better and are lossless. The only reason for the lossy compression was to try to preserve their intellectual property, i.e., keep everyone from being able to "decode" MQA.

As you already know, my crusade is dependent on undoing an already existant 'IP protection' scheme.   As of now, the corrective result is pretty close (very close) match between a 'pure' ABBA Arrival recording and a 'commodity' version with the processing.   Is it ready yet?   well, it audibly sounds very close, but with minor differences inclduing about +0.5dB >9kHz.

 

IMO (and I am being careful to avoid 'pushing' my position), we have been bamboozled on digitial media since the early 1980s.

Here is a contemporaneous article....   You wouldn't believe how difficult the mess is to decode though....

Some of you have seen the frustration and difficulty -- specs are just not available...

 

https://worldradiohistory.com/hd2/IDX-Business/Music/Billboard-Index/IDX/1983/1983-08-13-Billboard-Page-0010.pdf#search="cd mastering"

 

Later on today, I'll put up an A/B demo in the FA decoder subject.   The big difference is the 'decoded' version appears to have not been compressed, while the NEVERFA appears to have had some compression/mastering, but the tonality is nearly identical.    I'll also put up some simple, obvious demos.

 

Practically all of the tests, many are favorites, pass pretty well.   Been working on fine details for the last week.

 

John

 

 

[Confused]

14 hours ago, charlesphoto said:

@StephenJK Funny, we just bought a house built in 1987 that has literally hundreds of feet of cheap speaker cable run everywhere, inside and outside. Slowly but surely losing it all. 

Why not connect it all to something, and go fully immersive? It is quite the thing these days. 😀