MQA is Vaporware

[John_Atkinson]

3 hours ago, firedog said:

13 hours ago, mansr said:

The Mytek DACs have the same issue. Unless the MQA decoder is completely disabled, one of those horrid filters is used for all PCM.

It's a really good trick for making sure users perfer MQA, no?

Is this a problem with other MQA DACs, too? Do we know why it occurs? What's the bug (assuming a bug)?

 

"Completely disabled" gives the wrong impression. There is no "bug" with the Mytek DACs. You can easily switch off Mytek's MQA reconstruction filter with the on-screen menu. That then allows access to the non-MQA filters for all sources. With the Aurender A10 being discussed, even if you switch off the MQA filter to select other filters, this only works for S/PDIF data. The MQA filter is incorrectly applied to files sourced from the network or files stored on the A10 internal drive. That is the "bug" that was uncovered in the Stereophile review.

 

See https://www.stereophile.com/content/aurender-a10-network-music-playerserver-measurements

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

[John_Atkinson]

6 hours ago, Fokus said:

It is not even a given that these were ever reviewed before acceptance. I don't know the standards for AES journals.

 

Papers published in the Journal of the AES are peer-reviewed. Convention papers are not.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

AES member since 1981

 

[John_Atkinson]

1 hour ago, botrytis said:

 

They are getting paid to hawk it. It is as plain as the nose on your face.

 

 

That is incorrect, at least in the case of Stereophile and its associated websites. With respect, you should stick to subjects where you have actual evidence for your statements.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

[John_Atkinson]

4 minutes ago, Ran said:

Because these magazines report on what they are given by the industry. There is no investigative journalism, technical research or perspective.

 

Er, https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-tested-part-2-fold

https://www.stereophile.com/content/more-mqa

https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-some-claims-examined

 

Perhaps you missed these articles?

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

[John_Atkinson]

28 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

I see quite a bit of pushback in the comments sections of Austin's articles. I wonder how

many Mr. Atkinson purged.

Only those that were flames aimed at specific posters. Flame-free criticisms are allowed to stand, of course.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

[John_Atkinson]

30 minutes ago, adamdea said:

An impulse-response test is that, but because an impulse contains all the frequencies—for band-limited systems, all the in-band frequencies—it's a useful and commonly used measure of a system's overall fidelity.”

Hmm really? If so how does that work? Talk me through an example of how we measure the overall fidelity of two systems in this way.

 For Stereophile's speaker reviews I use the calculated impulse response (derived from either an MLS or a chirp signal) to measure the fidelity of the speaker under test. See, for example, https://www.stereophile.com/content/kef-reference-5-loudspeaker-measurements where I derive, from the measured impulse response, the frequency response, the radiation pattern in vertical and horizontal planes, the in-room response, the step response, and the cumulative spectra-decay plot.

 

For measurements of digital products I use a diagnostic signal that I created 20 years ago, comprising a single sample at 0dBFS to derive the impulse response of the reconstruction filter. This maps the filter coefficients, revealing if it is minimum- or linear-phase and whether it has a fast or slow rolloff.

 

I am currently using the analog equivalent of this signal, generated with a monostable multivibrator circuit I built,  to characterize all the A/D converters I have available, to examine the dispersion of their anti-aliasing filters. I actually used this signal many years ago, to examine the behavior of Wadia's spline filter; see

https://www.stereophile.com/content/wadia-850-cd-player-page-2

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

[John_Atkinson]

25 minutes ago, mansr said:

What is the rise/fall time and duration of this pulse?

 

As an infinitely narrow pulse has an infinitely wide spectrum, I thought I'd start there then gradually increase the generator's time constant. :-)

 

(Note to CA habituees: the smiley emoticon reveals that I was making a wisecrack. This, in meatspace, is known as "humor," something that generally seems lacking on-line.)

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

[John_Atkinson]

10 minutes ago, mansr said:

I wasn't asking for a joke.

 

As I wrote but you deleted from your answer, " Note to CA habituees: the smiley emoticon reveals that I was making a wisecrack. This, in meatspace, is known as "humor," something that generally seems lacking on-line.)"

 

You illustrate my point, for which I thank you :-)

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

[John_Atkinson]

22 hours ago, Rt66indierock said:

Art Dudley is my ace in the hole. As editor of The Absolute Sound it went broke (with a lot of assistance from Harry [Pearson] of course) then he started Listener Magazine and it went broke in 2002. 

 

Just to correct your misstatements:

 

1) Art Dudley was never editor of The Absolute Sound.

 

2) Listener didn't go broke while Art was its editor and publisher. Art and his wife sold it to Belvoir Publications, who wanted to turn it into a less-specialized book, like our Sound&Vision. That caused it to lose its core audience and it was closed after Art was long gone.

 

And just to disabuse you of the notion you are spreading that Stereophile is dying, it has a greater circulation than HiFi News, What HiFi, Tha Absolute Sound, and HiFi+ combined. Its website has more unique visitors and overall page views each month than any other English-language specialty audio site.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

[John_Atkinson]

7 hours ago, Rt66indierock said:

13 hours ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

1) Art Dudley was never editor of The Absolute Sound.

 

 

John,

Art Dudley was interviewed by Steven R. Rochlin of Enjoy the Music. In that interview Art said he worked as The Absolute Sound’s Managing Editor.

 

That is correct. A magazine's managing editor is the person who handles the mechanics of turning the content produced and overseen by the editor for each issue into a finalized package that is sent to the printer. He or she is in charge of copy flow, copy editing, supervising layout, and proofing. It is the actual editor, or editor-in-chief, who decides on the content and is therefore responsible for the magzine's success or lack thereof. In Stereophile's case that person is me; with The Absolute Sound when Art Dudley was employed there, that person was Harry Pearson.

 

Quote

And after he sold Listener he stayed on as Editor with a salary.

 

Yes, for a while, but he left because of the conflict between what he wanted Listener to remain and what the new owners wished.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

[John_Atkinson]

On 4/18/2018 at 1:31 PM, crenca said:

On 4/18/2018 at 12:49 PM, beetlemania said:

 

Austin says it's not DRM - I know you're shocked! - but allows space for alternative interpretations.

 

I have not read this piece...

 

It's now posted on-line at https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-drm-and-other-four-letter-words

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

[John_Atkinson]

39 minutes ago, labjr said:

DON'T CLICK ON IT!

 

Too late! (I laugh Sam Tellig's evil laugh...)

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

[John_Atkinson]

7 hours ago, Brinkman Ship said:

The great MQA chearleader [sic] defends the honor of MQA from 10,000 miles away . . .
https://www.stereophile.com/content/arts-thursday-munich-part-two#Z2IvHkLMPaJsC1ui.99

 

This is the first time Art Dudley has ever commented on MQA. Don't see, therefore, how he can be called "the great MQA [chearleader."]

 

And take a look at https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-aliasing-b-splines-centers-gravity

There's an interesting listening test embedded in the text.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

[John_Atkinson]

3 hours ago, shtf said:

it seems clear these stakes were not taken into consideration when Atkinson claimed 4 years BEFORE MQA was released and after just I think 1 maybe 2 short demo's that Atkinson's experience was the equivalent to observing the birth of new planets, "blew his socks off",  along with a few other seemingly off-the-cuff responses. 

 

My news report on was written in December 2014, so that would make your estimate of the format's launch December 2018. Perhaps your math needs work? And what is wrong with my writing a news report on new technology?

 

As to the rest of your post, please read what I actually wrote back then, not your "Chinese Whispers" account:

https://www.stereophile.com/content/ive-heard-future-streaming-meridians-mqa

 

Thank you for doing so. Note, BTW, the exchange between Archimago and myself in the comments, where I mention the DRM-like aspect of MQA, something that I have been accused on CA of ignoring.

 

John Atknson

Editor, Stereophile

 

[John_Atkinson]

2 minutes ago, wdw said:

I, in a moderate tone, challenged his posts (below) and mine was deleted but not his.  WTF!

 

Actually, I deleted some of Dalethorn's as well as your postings.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

[John_Atkinson]

8 hours ago, tmtomh said:

You - and Atkinson, and Jim Austin - each have made a conscious, and scurrilous, decision to act as civility police on someone else's forum,

 

I don't believe I have made any comments on this forum about the lack of civility displayed by CA posters. Could you provide a link where I did do so, please.

 

As moderator as stereophile.com, I have deleted posts that I judge to be flames or are personally insulting. But I  don't delete posts that are critical of Stereophile or of our coverage of MQA. You can see that spacehound, indie66rock, and Archimago are regular posters to Stereophile's site. Note, also, that contrary to something was said earlier in this thread, I don't block people from posting except as an extreme action. I think that in the 13 years we have allowed third-party comments on our site, I have banned less than 5 people.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

[John_Atkinson]

8 hours ago, wdw said:

So this little story goes to possibility there may be something betwixt the major authors in the print magazines, RH, JA and MQA, and the possibility that amounts of money may have been suggested if they were willing to jump on this MQA parade.

 

For the record, I have no financial stake in MQA anymore than Chris Connacker has. Please put your conspiracy theories back in your pocket.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

[John_Atkinson]

6 hours ago, beetlemania said:

What I object to is the near complete silence from the print mags about what happens if MQA becomes the only format available...

 

Silence? Google is your friend:

https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-drm-and-other-four-letter-words

https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-benefits-and-costs

https://www.stereophile.com/content/more-mqa

 

Note that I also discussed the benefit of MQA to the record industry back in December 2014,:

https://www.stereophile.com/content/ive-heard-future-streaming-meridians-mqa

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

[John_Atkinson]

12 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

JA's speculation is of little value - imagine if medical devices or drugs were not subjected to modern scientific methods before being released on a hapless public

 

Please note that I have not offered speculations about formal blind testing of audio components. Over the past 40 year years I have been involved in such tests as designer, proctor, or test subject. As a result of that experience, I have concluded that reducing the variables in such a test to just the one you are investigating is more difficult than  people appreciate. And if you don't reduce the variables as require by Scientific Method, the results of such a test will be meaningless. You can read my reasoning for reaching this conclusion at

https://www.stereophile.com/content/2011-richard-c-heyser-memorial-lecture-where-did-negative-frequencies-go-measuring-sound-qua

and https://www.stereophile.com/content/simple-everything-appears-simple

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

 

[John_Atkinson]

12 hours ago, shtf said:

I'm confident I can produce a fairly lengthy list of evidence and/or behaviors I think will show a high probability that you and perhaps others indeed have a stake in MQA's success. 

 

"Probability"? Like I said, a conspiracy theory.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

[John_Atkinson]

27 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

It is just speculation.  It is unclear to me why you think it is not. 

 

Because my opinion has been formed as the result of extensive experience of the subject, the experience of designing, organizing, and taking part in blind tests that are intended to detect small but real audible differences. Again, I refer you to the 2 articles of mine that I linked to in my previous response. Until you have done so, I don't see any point in continuing this discussion.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

[John_Atkinson]

2 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

I read your articles, and had read them before. 

 

Thank you for that at least.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

[John_Atkinson]

17 hours ago, shtf said:

Musically perfect...., across the board"  -John Atkinson editor-in-chief Stereophile magazine after listening to the Vandersteen model 7A speakers at CES 2014. 

 

Those interested can find the quoted text at https://www.stereophile.com/content/ja’s-best-sound-ces-vandersteen’s-model-7-speakers

 

If you don't want to visit Stereophile's website and by doing so gift us a page view, please note that shtf selectively quoted me. This is what I actually wrote:

"with an LP of Diana Krall singing Joni Mitchell’s “A Case of You,” the hairs on the back of my neck stood up, so powerfully physical was the presence of the singer in the room.

The Naim/Focal, Marten/Pass Labs, and Sony/Pass Labs exhibits got close to the Vandersteens in absolute sound quality, and all were even better in some respects. But none were quite so musically perfect across the board!"

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

[John_Atkinson]

2 hours ago, shtf said:

If I misquoted you I apologize as it’s been several years and I did not save an older version of your Vandersteen endorsement but I certainly don't recall reading your endorsement the way it’s currently written.  That said, I have to believe that if anybody has the keys to alter past Stereophile articles, you would certainly be one of the keymasters.

 

You have my word that the text in my report on the Vandersteen room at CES has not been altered since it was first posted on January 19, 2014.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

[John_Atkinson]

7 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

Your word is good enough for me.

Thank you.

 

7 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

Do you feel MQA sounds superior to 24/96 PCM?

Yes, in most of the comparisons I have performed.

 

7 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

Do you have a financial or other stake, reason to benefit, from the adoption of MQA?

No, None, Nada.

 

7 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

Do you feel MQA would genuinely benefit the recording and music business?

 

For the business aspects of the record industry, yes. But as I have written in Stereophile, the potential reduction in format choice for end users is not a good thing. See

https://www.stereophile.com/content/more-mqa

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile