MQA is Vaporware

[The Computer Audiophile]

4 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

I attended the presentation at AXPONA because many opponents of MQA - including, IIRC, Chris Connaker - had said they would be there to ask Mike Jbara questions. However, as you can read in my report - https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-master-class - none of the critics turned up. So it goes.

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

 

I would've loved to be there, but as you know shows get going and one can lose track of time easily. 

[Rt66indierock]

5 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

I attended the presentation at AXPONA because many opponents of MQA - including, IIRC, Chris Connaker - had said they would be there to ask Mike Jbara questions. However, as you can read in my report - https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-master-class - none of the critics turned up. So it goes.

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

 

 

More importantly are the MQA people going to show up at RMAF? And of course who will be coming to RMAF from Stereophile?

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

50 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

I attended the presentation at AXPONA because many opponents of MQA - including, IIRC, Chris Connaker - had said they would be there to ask Mike Jbara questions. However, as you can read in my report - https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-master-class - none of the critics turned up. So it goes.

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

 

so the passive aggressive mode seems to be the playback for MQA apologists at this point. Ok.

[firedog]

59 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

I attended the presentation at AXPONA because many opponents of MQA - including, IIRC, Chris Connaker - had said they would be there to ask Mike Jbara questions. However, as you can read in my report - https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-master-class - none of the critics turned up. So it goes.

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

 

Maybe after the screaming and table pounding directed at Chris at his previous appearance, it's considered by many a waste of time to try....Or was that the point of the rude behavior? 

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

7 minutes ago, firedog said:

Maybe after the screaming and table pounding directed at Chris at his previous appearance, it's considered by many a waste of time to try....Or was that the point of the rude behavior? 

Yes, can you IMAGINE attending someone else's presentation and then interrupting with questions and attacks.?

 

Sheesh. That could never happen.  🤣

[botrytis]

2 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I understand. It's like watching Lawrence Taylor sack Joe Theismann. Painful to watch.

 

I was actually thinking Dick Butkus.......

[botrytis]

1 hour ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

I attended the presentation at AXPONA because many opponents of MQA - including, IIRC, Chris Connaker - had said they would be there to ask Mike Jbara questions. However, as you can read in my report - https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-master-class - none of the critics turned up. So it goes.

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

 

 

I was going to go but I was attending the show with a friend who wanted nothing to do with the presentation (as we had so many rooms to go through). Also, after the MQA contingent got done with Chris at RMAF, the previous year, I figured if I would have asked a question, I would have gotten a shoe thrown at me. 

[Confused]

The AXPONA presentation reminded me of this......

 

 

 

[MikeyFresh]

1 hour ago, John_Atkinson said:

I attended the presentation at AXPONA because many opponents of MQA - including, IIRC, Chris Connaker - had said they would be there to ask Mike Jbara questions. However, as you can read in my report - https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-master-class - none of the critics turned up. So it goes.

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

 

 

Did you ask any challenging questions, or are you of the opinion there are none to be asked?

[crenca]

2 hours ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

I attended the presentation at AXPONA because many opponents of MQA - including, IIRC, Chris Connaker - had said they would be there to ask Mike Jbara questions. However, as you can read in my report - https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-master-class - none of the critics turned up. So it goes.

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

 

 

 

I had to thank you for your honesty here JA!  Notice why you attended the presentation.  Not to be an "audio journalist" yourself - not to ask the hard, factual questions yourself or as a "journalist" for Stereophile around the truth of MQA.  No, your were there because of the controversy itself, and (if your honest) what you consider the sideshow of these "opponents", who themselves are more interesting.  You agree with A. Quint and others who think the actual consumers of MQA have no real ability or even interest in the truth of MQA, and thus are in a social/political manner merely "reacting" and that is the story worth watching and attending.  

 

No doubt you consider our host Chris C to be somewhat of a fool - an insider who got caught up with the rabble consumers and betrayed his position and place in the industry.

 

Oh well...Stereophile and the like were never about journalism in the first place.  So it goes.

[Thuaveta]

3 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I would've loved to be there, but as you know shows get going and one can lose track of time easily. 

 

Or, as Team MQA would put it, one can easily loose one's shoe...

1 hour ago, MikeyFresh said:

Did you ask any challenging questions, or are you of the opinion there are none to be asked?

 

Or, maybe more worrisome, do you simply feel you wouldn't be speaking from a place where you could ask those questions ?

[crenca]

2 hours ago, Thuaveta said:

 

Or, maybe more worrisome, do you simply feel you wouldn't be speaking from a place where you could ask those questions ?

 

This is right.  Even if Atkinson, Austin, and the like had the technical background in signal processing, software/digital and its ever present IP/DRM/market plays - do they have that sort of relationship with their own work and the industry?  The answer to me is a rather obvious "no".  They are trade/product promoters, not "journalists".

[lucretius]

10 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

For your Wednesday morning viewing pleasure...

 

 

 

He clearly said that "the majority of music listening, even if it's not necessarily how most of us in this room are listening, but the majority of listening is going on in smartphones and automobiles.  And so for artists and their labels to be able to take a higher quality experience to the biggest segment of the audience, they needed enabling technology that can do that."  Despite the 'higher quality experience' BS, Jbara did, de facto, just admit that the 'audiophile market' is not the primary target market for MQA technology.

[lucretius]

7 hours ago, firedog said:

Oh, I'm sure the material is "signed off" on by someone - the question is by whom? We already know that it can be a record company paper pusher, and not any artist-musician, producer, or engineer of the original. 

The most obvious example is very old legacy material - the principals aren't even around to "authenticate". 

 

Surely, Warner isn't calling in the original artists, producers, or engineers to "authenticate" the MQAing of their catalog.

[GUTB]

MQA is probably here to stay. The quality gains can't be ignored. I mean, you CAN ignore it but it won't serve you well. I now have several MQA-CDs and its the best thing since SACD. You do need a decent MQA DAC though. 

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

Just now, GUTB said:

MQA is probably here to stay. The quality gains can't be ignored. I mean, you CAN ignore it but it won't serve you well. I now have several MQA-CDs and its the best thing since SACD. You do need a decent MQA DAC though. 

LOL!!!! Thanks for the laugh Gumby. I mean, a real belly ache....whoo...I almost teared up.

 

[GUTB]

Just now, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

LOL!!!! Thanks for the laugh Gumby. I mean, a real belly ache....whoo...I almost teared up.

 

 

Can you describe your MQA playback chain which led to your anti-MQA stance?

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

1 minute ago, GUTB said:

 

Can you describe your MQA playback chain which led to your anti-MQA stance?

You are a gift that keeps on giving!!! MQA-CD at 12 bits as good as SACD! What a hoot!!!!

 

Do you do stand up on open mike nights? On the weekend?😂

[GUTB]

4 minutes ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

You are a gift that keeps on giving!!! MQA-CD at 12 bits as good as SACD! What a hoot!!!!

 

Do you do stand up on open mike nights? On the weekend?😂

 

I'm neurotypical. "Greatest thing since SACD" means the greatest innovation in sound quality since SACD, not that it necessarily competes with the quality of SACD (it does). 

[The Computer Audiophile]

6 minutes ago, GUTB said:

 

I'm neurotypical. "Greatest thing since SACD" means the greatest innovation in sound quality since SACD, not that it necessarily competes with the quality of SACD (it does). 

Which MQA CDs do you have?

 

I’d bet a lot of money that any sonic improvements you hear are due to mastering. 

 

If you like the sound, nobody can argue with that. It’s the underlying technology that is the issue for most people. 

[kumakuma]

2 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Which MQA CDs do you have?

 

I’d bet a lot of money that any sonic improvements you hear are due to mastering. 

 

If you like the sound, nobody can argue with that. It’s the underlying technology that is the issue for most people. 

 

I applaud your attempt to engage with GUTB on a neurotypical basis.

 

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

7 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Which MQA CDs do you have?

 

I’d bet a lot of money that any sonic improvements you hear are due to mastering. 

 

If you like the sound, nobody can argue with that. It’s the underlying technology that is the issue for most people. 

Correction: Any sonic improvements are imagined. Most if not all of these MQA CDs are dumbed down versions of previously released Hirez versions. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

Correction: Any sonic improvements are imagined. Most if not all of these MQA CDs are dumbed down versions of previously released Hirez versions. 

Incorrect. If he has a previous CD and is comparing it to MQA CD, there may be sonic improvements due to mastering etc...

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Incorrect. If he has a previous CD and is comparing it to MQA CD, there may be sonic improvements due to mastering etc...

that is too speculative...sorry.  He compared the quality to SACD. Older CDs having nothing to do with his statement. It is clear from another thread he is not to be taken seriously anyway.

[jabbr]

49 minutes ago, GUTB said:

 

I'm neurotypical. "Greatest thing since SACD" means the greatest innovation in sound quality since SACD, not that it necessarily competes with the quality of SACD (it does). 

 

You are decidedly not neurotypical by any reasonable definition of the term. BTW that last sentence is incoherent. Do you mean that MQA is an improvement over SACD (greatest innovation in sound quality) or competes with SACD? Understand that my world is not bandwidth limited, nor has been since 1980. 

 

In my world the greatest innovation since SACD is DSD512. Since when do you cut corners, and go for lossy compression? Get a real phone.