MQA is Vaporware

[Shadders]

Hi,

Does anyone have the filter coefficients for the filters used by MQA ?

Thanks and regards,

Shadders.

[mansr]

1 hour ago, Shadders said:

Does anyone have the filter coefficients for the filters used by MQA ?

I have the "render" filters.

[Shadders]

Just now, mansr said:

I have the "render" filters.

Hi mansr,

OK - i assume that these are leaky filters (32 taps ??) used by the DAC ?

Thanks and regards,

Shadders.

[mansr]

1 minute ago, Shadders said:

OK - i assume that these are leaky filters (32 taps ??) used by the DAC ?

Correct.

[Shadders]

3 minutes ago, mansr said:

Correct.

Hi mansr,

Thanks - is it ok to send them or would this be verboten ?

Thanks and regards,

Shadders.

[mansr]

11 minutes ago, Shadders said:

Thanks - is it ok to send them or would this be verboten ?

I'll publish them somewhere tomorrow.

[Shadders]

1 minute ago, mansr said:

I'll publish them somewhere tomorrow.

Hi mansr,

OK - thanks - much appreciated. I just wanted to run them through Octave to see their response etc.

I am working through a DSP book, and at the stage here i can examine real world filters, with the tools provided by the book etc.

Regards,

Shadders.

[mansr]

9 minutes ago, Shadders said:

OK - thanks - much appreciated. I just wanted to run them through Octave to see their response etc.

I am working through a DSP book, and at the stage here i can examine real world filters, with the tools provided by the book etc.

 

Here's a plot of the frequency responses used for 2x upsampling:

These were generated using the freqz function in Octave.

[Shadders]

12 minutes ago, mansr said:

 

Here's a plot of the frequency responses used for 2x upsampling:

These were generated using the freqz function in Octave.

Hi mansr,

Thanks. Is it still ok to provide the filter coefficients ?

Regards,

Shadders.

[mansr]

5 minutes ago, Shadders said:

Thanks. Is it still ok to provide the filter coefficients ?

Sure.

[Shadders]

Hi mansr,

Super. Thank you very much.

Regards,

Shadders.

[Charles Hansen]

16 hours ago, synn said:

 TBH, When I am in the mood to discover and sample new music (Or listen to obscure scandinavian heavy metal bands), Spotify has me covered. When I really like something, something that I want to listen to at a higher quality, I go and buy it from one of the various high res stores around.

 

I "Acquire" maybe 10% of what I listen to.

 

I know of many music lovers who use this exact same strategy. I believe it combines the best of both worlds - less than the best sound quality for a very low (or free with ads) cost, when all that is desired is background music or discovering new music, and then buying the things you like in the format  (digital or analog) you like for music that you will want to listen to repeatedly.

 

Cheers!

[Charles Hansen]

15 hours ago, lucretius said:

Look at it this way:  How many people outside of China would buy audio equipment (made in China) from companies with Chinese names?  It's just marketing; some of it makes sense, some of it does not.

 

Hi Lucretius,

 

Yes, there is definitely a grey area. The company now known as LG was previously called "GoldStar" in the US, which is a contraction of its full name "Lucky GoldStar". They are a Korean company, and in phonetically spelled Korean this is Leogki Geumseong, which happens to have the same initials as the English equivalent. In many Asian cultures, it is considered wise to name the company after things that are believed to bring good fortune. In Asian cultures the name "Lucky Gold Star" is about as good as it gets as all three words connote good fortune.

 

However in the US market, "Lucky GoldStar" sounds pretty cheesy and I don't believe they ever marketed anything in the US with their full English-translated name, only the abbreviation "Goldstar". But at some point they clearly felt that even this sounded cheesy and of foreign origin, so they contracted it to LG, which is pretty innocuous.

 

On the other hand Astell & Kern (at least in my opinion) were deliberately trying to be deceptive with their name choice. They arose at a time when many of the storied UK audio manufacturers had been acquired by Chinese interests, often keeping the design and development in the UK and transferring all production to China (eg, KEF). To me it came off as a brazen attempt to either deceive people that it was a British company, or at the very least designed in the UK but manufactured in Korea.

 

Why? Because Astell & Kern are not just words but clearly surnames. It was like copying the name "Bowers & Wilkins", the names of two real English people who really lived in the UK and really designed and manufactured their products in the UK for decades. Contrast this case to (say) ConversDigital, another Korean technology company. While they have clearly chose a name that the English-speaking world can pronounce and understand, I've no idea what "Convers" means. Is it supposed to be a contraction of "converse"? And if so, "converse" has two distinct meanings - one is to communicate with another person, while the other is that something is literally turned around or the opposite. In any event, there is no clear intent to hide the country of origin.

 

There are many factors involved in selecting the name of a company or product. I remember at one time Theta (which uses names for their products, rather than model numbers) had a really cool name for a product but they rejected it, simply because it had so many "r"s and "l"s in it that it would extremely difficult for a native Japanese  to pronounce. (Sorry I've forgotten the name.)

 

But that is very different from deliberate attempts of deception. It would be as if I wanted to sell products in a specific market, whether it were Nigeria or China, and then choosing a name that made it appear that my company was based in either of those two countries.

[Fokus]

30 minutes ago, Charles Hansen said:

The company now known as LG was previously called "GoldStar" in the US, which is a contraction of its full name "Lucky GoldStar". ...

However in the US market, "Lucky GoldStar" sounds pretty cheesy and I don't believe they ever marketed anything in the US with their full English-translated name, only the abbreviation "Goldstar". But at some point they clearly felt that even this sounded cheesy and of foreign origin, so they contracted it to LG,

 

That is not correct.

 

There was electronics company Goldstar, who traded under that name, also in the West.

Then there was plastics company Lucky.

Lucky and Goldstar merged in the 90s, and immediately rebranded as LG.

 

[Fokus]

12 hours ago, Archimago said:

I assume they think all audiophiles must read articles like those in TAS and sheepishly follow the wise words of these gurus... 

 

hanging out at dealerships in the 80s and 90s taught me that, back then, the majority of customers indeed behaved like that. And the dealers willingly provided. But once the shop doors closed behind such customers, the discussions I could have with the same dealers were of an entirely different level,  when it comes to technicalities and honesty.

[Ralf11]

What's wrong with China?

[Hifi Bob]

17 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

What's wrong with China?

Now, in the realm of design and manufacturing quality, nothing.

However, it is only a relatively short period of time since the answer to this question would have been ‘everything’.

In the transition period, it made sense for those companies climbing the quality ladder to distance themselves as much as possible from the reputations of old.

[Confused]

2 hours ago, Charles Hansen said:

 

On the other hand Astell & Kern (at least in my opinion) were deliberately trying to be deceptive with their name choice. They arose at a time when many of the storied UK audio manufacturers had been acquired by Chinese interests, often keeping the design and development in the UK and transferring all production to China (eg, KEF). To me it came off as a brazen attempt to either deceive people that it was a British company, or at the very least designed in the UK but manufactured in Korea.

 

An interesting and thought provoking post Charles.  One bit of 'fact checking' though, KEF was on the verge of bankruptcy when it was bought by a Hong Kong based company (which was run by an audio enthusiast), which both provided much needed cash and set up a purpose built facility in China for mass production.  However, whilst the more affordable products (or high volume products) are made in China, the Muon, Blade and Reference series are still manufactured in Maidstone in the UK.  As an aside, KEF also make drivers for the very Italian Sonus Faber and rather American Wilson Audio.  The harder you look at things, the more global they start to look.  Picking up on Ralf's point, I own both British and Chinese built KEF products, and the quality is good for both, in fact relative to the price paid, you could easily argue the Chinese kit is better.

 

In terms of deceiving the public, I always liked the story of a British guy who was importing cheap TV's from China to sell in the UK.  A poor business until he managed to buy the rights to the very historic but defunct Bush TV brand, a quick change of logo and the TV's could be sold easily.  The Bush Electronics name is now owned by the UK's retail giant Home Retail Group.  Some serious cash has been made along the way I suspect.

 

As a non audio distraction, during these days of Brexit in the UK, I am always very surprised when I watch the news and see the UK's Chancellor of the Exchequer Philip Hammond (AKA spreadsheet Phil) climbing out of the back of his very German looking chauffeur driven 7 series BMW.  You would never see a German politician in a Jag, that is for sure.  Our Prime Minister shows far better taste, typically using a British built Jaguar XJ.  When you look at this though, Jaguar is now owned by the Indian based Tata Motors, and BMW manufacture both the Mini and Rolls Royce in the UK, so could be considered a British company, at least in part.  

 

Last weekend I watched the Mercedes F1 team win the 2017 constructors title, quietly satisfied that both the Mercedes car and engine are built in England, with of course an English driver, who happens to have Jamaican ancestry.

 

The world is going global I think!

 

All terribly off topic....   MQA is British too I think, hooray!

[Charles Hansen]

16 hours ago, synn said:

You are right though, the 2L tracks are not the best mastered tracks around. I have some albums purchased from the B&W Society of Sound website that are 96 KHz and blow the 2L tracks away.

 

This is an interesting data point. While the mastering clearly will affect the sound quality of any recording, so will innumerable other factors. What recording venues was used? Which microphones were used? Where were the microphones placed and how were they oriented? Which mic preamps were used? Which brand and model of microphone cable were used? What A/D converter was used (if the recording went straight to digital)? What was the original format? Was there a sample rate converter used between recording and release? If so, which one? Here is a link to an article that describes the equipment used by 2L:

 

http://www.soundstageglobal.com/index.php/shows-events/twbas-2012-north-carolina-usa/84-twbas-2012-product-profiles/195-2l-q2l-twbas-2012-samplerq

 

We don't know the microphones, preamps, or cables, but many of 2L's recordings are done in multi-channel. Apparently most of the recent ones use the A/D converter built into the Pyramix DAW made by Merging Technologies of Switzerland. I've no idea how that sounds, as if you think about it, all of the same factors that affect the sound quality of a DAC also affect the sound quality of an ADC:

 

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/35106-how-does-a-perfect-dac-analog-signal-look-different-than-a-cheap-dac/?page=7&tab=comments#comment-713189

 

If you look at the graphs in the linked article, the DAC in the Pyramix really can't do much more than about 96/24 before the noise floor of the converter begins to rise and obscure any musical harmonics that might be captured with a good 192/24 converter. Who knows how good the analog circuitry inside there is?

 

The point is that there is not any particular reason to think that the 2L recordings will sound any better than something made in the '50s by RCA or Decca when they were using ribbon and condenser microphones with tubed signal chains all the way through. Newer is NOT always better...

[Charles Hansen]

19 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

To close this particular topic, I want to bring your attention to this train wreck (now only available on the Internet Archive) that the younger people would rightly call an "epic fail".  It celebrates the rise of the crowd-sourced funding model, and enthusiastically predicts the demise of the more traditional audio gear manufacturers that distribute primarily through brick and mortar.  Scroll to the bottom of the article to see the author.

 

Excellent catch - thanks for the link!

[Miska]

24 minutes ago, Charles Hansen said:

We don't know the microphones, preamps, or cables, but many of 2L's recordings are done in multi-channel. Apparently most of the recent ones use the A/D converter built into the Pyramix DAW made by Merging Technologies of Switzerland. I've no idea how that sounds, as if you think about it, all of the same factors that affect the sound quality of a DAC also affect the sound quality of an ADC:

 

They usually list the most important pieces in the recording literature, like for 2L-38:

"This recording was made with DPA microphones, Millennia Media amplifiers and SPHYNX2 converters to a PYRAMIX workstation, all within the DXD-domain."

 

There are also some fairly detailed pictures of the recording events in their literature.

 

The better DPA mics use 130V phantom power, so that also limits the set of available microphone amplifiers.

 

Some related things I found somewhere in the past:

http://www.dpamicrophones.com/microphones/ddicate/4003-omnidirectional-microphone-130-v

https://www.mil-media.com/HV-3C.html

https://www.mil-media.com/HV-3D-8.html

http://www.digitalaudio.dk/AX24-ADDA-Converter-.2111.aspx

 

 

Channel Classics on the other hand, IIRC, uses also B&K / DPA mics and the Grimm AD-1 converter. I believe the mic pre-amps are custom built. I believe they now also use Merging Horus converter.

 

[lucretius]

3 hours ago, Fokus said:

 

That is not correct.

 

There was electronics company Goldstar, who traded under that name, also in the West.

Then there was plastics company Lucky.

Lucky and Goldstar merged in the 90s, and immediately rebranded as LG.

 

 

According to Wikipedia, Lucky and Goldstar merged and formed Lucky-GoldStar in 1958.   In 1995 the Lucky-GoldStar Corporation was renamed "LG".

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Corporation

 

... which seems to conflict with this Wikipedia page:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Electronics

 

You can't always trust Wikipedia.

[Charles Hansen]

3 hours ago, Fokus said:

That is not correct.

 

There was electronics company Goldstar, who traded under that name, also in the West.

Then there was plastics company Lucky.

Lucky and Goldstar merged in the 90s, and immediately rebranded as LG.

 

WTF?

 

Can Wikipedia know less than you do?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Corporation

[lucretius]

Delete

[Charles Hansen]

31 minutes ago, lucretius said:

 

According to Wikipedia, Lucky and Goldstar merged and formed Lucky-GoldStar in 1958.   In 1995 the Lucky-GoldStar Corporation was renamed "LG".

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Corporation

 

... which seems to conflict with this Wikipedia page:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Electronics

 

You can't always trust Wikipedia.

 

While i completely agree that you can't always trust Wikipedia (especially when it comes to politics or history), something as simple as the history of a company shouldn't be that controversial. EDIT: Yes, there are discrepancies. "Corporation" says that GoldStar was founded in 1952 and merged with Lucky in 1958, while "Electronics" says that GoldStar was founded in 1958 and merged with Lucky in 1995.

 

Apparently something as simple as the history of a foreign company can be completely screwed up by Wikipedia...

 

Apologies to all!