MQA is Vaporware

[4est]

???

Isn't that illegal?

I am trying to make most of my CDs go away soon...

 

But I fear it will take a looong time. I load up a few at a time and trade them in for other used ones at ye old local CD trading place.

[4est]

I was taking "load up" to mean rip. Obviously I was mistaken.

Trading physical CDs for each other, buying them, or selling them used is perfectly legal. Ripping then selling is questionable in the US and AIUI illegal in the U.K. Selling rips is illegal in the US.

[4est]

If this is the CG that used to post here, he is worth listening to!

I read some posts of his and it would be a good conversation to have.

[4est]

13 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I look at this like any other job. If you want to invent Post-It Notes on your own, go for it. Otherwise go work for 3M who will pay you peanuts compared to the value of the invention. 

 

 

Magneplanar !

[4est]

Just now, botrytis said:

 AND AUDIO RESEARCH!!!!

 

 

What did ARC have to do with 3M?

[4est]

On 6/3/2017 at 11:38 PM, PeterSt said:

M-Q-AAAAAAAAAAAA

Is this your subtle way of reminding us the MQA'S filter post rings like a bell?

[4est]

31 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

Subtle?

 

Believe it or not, as first written it read  "(not so ) subtle", but I wasn't looking to throw PeterSt under the bus and decided against it.

[4est]

2 hours ago, Jud said:

 

Subtle?

 

With all of this talk of DRM, somebody had to say it. Remind us it is a repackaging a pig with new lipstick while proclaiming it to be this new great thing. Amazing what working a frenzy over time can do.

[4est]

7 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

I admit to liking the classics, but he loves the new ones. Yuck!

Yep, the new ones are butt ugly IMO.

[4est]

1 hour ago, PeterV said:

What is even smarter than I thought  is the way MQA is able to use all these discussions regarding their technology totally in their advantage. This amount of free publicity by nay- and yes- sayers is priceless. If MQA would be an inferior format like MP3, no audiophile listener or criticaster would care to discuss it. Now, the fuzz and buzz is a strong marketing tool :-) just count the amount of times the 3 letters are being mentioned every day.. just listen and you will understand that it's all about about the MUSIC

"just count the amount of times the 3 letters are being mentioned every day.. just listen and you will understand that it's all about about the MUSIC"  Money

[4est]

2 hours ago, FredericV said:

End to end is a joke, MQA allows tube dac's to be certified. No studio I know uses tube dacs for their critical listening. I must conclude there's a lot of quack here.

I must say that I am a bit confused by your insistence that putting a tube into a DAC relegates it into the "sub critical" listening category. Sure studios might not use them, but what's the big deal. You might not like them, but there are some very well regarded DACs with tubes in them. One might complain about the output transformers in most tube amps, but there are no intrinsic sonic disadvantages to using tubes in line level components.

[4est]

1 minute ago, FredericV said:

 

Tubes break the end-to-end analog promise MQA is claiming, as they add harmonics which were not in the input signal.

While I don't dislike tubes, tubes have coloration. DAC specific coloration is what MQA's marketing tries to undo.
 

And so you are suggesting that solid state IVs and line level outputs do not have colorations?

[4est]

1 minute ago, PeterV said:

You really have no clue Frederic. I seem to have made a lucky choice with NAD 390DD. It is relatively affordable and it is build around the fully digital architecture a the 35 bit 844 kHz PWM DAC. Plenty of headspace for full 24 (or more!) resolution. Check the specs and reviews on the web. As mentioned earlier A/B testing shows MQA is a clear winner here at home and I am very satisfied with those albums I know by heart.

But MQA does not have 24 bits worth of information anyway. It's simply lossy compression with shitty filters of (perhaps) nice remasters. The ringing makes my head hurt whenever I try to listen to them.

[4est]

18 minutes ago, witchdoctor said:

If Bruno is the engineer he claims to be he should invent something better than MQA instead of going around whining about it. He should stick with amps. The guy was very sheepish when he asked his question and instead of producing a better solution what does he do? What all malcontent engineers like to do, whine.
Bob may not have done blind testing but the labels did tons of it in what they call test groups when they were doing their due diligence. They went all in on MQA so what do you think the results were? Duh.

 

 

Why would he need to invent something better than MQA when it already exists. Its called Hi Rez, and MQA is a solution without a problem, and a poor one at that. The more you respond, the more of a fool you seem. I'm left no choice but to keep you on ignore, and I hate doing that to anyone...

[4est]

Can you even comprehend what you read? There is nothing new about MQA, and never has been. It has been reverse engineered. What people are concerned about is the built in DRM that may get used in the future.

[4est]

15 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

I might agree with you if he wasn't treating the forum like Twitter.  Most of his "content" is quick-hit posts.  He's being thoroughly disingenuous.  He never elaborates on any of his posts.  He has no desire to make a case, he's just spamming.  Honest advocacy is, of course, a good thing.  But this has all the earmarks of a guerilla marketing campaign.  I don't care if he claims to like helping starving children.  It's not the thing he's advocating for, it's how he's doing it.  I see that Chris likes your post.  Perhaps this is the MQA "balance" he was hoping for? 

I find this to be a double standard from what you have stated in the Civility thread. He has not broken the terms of service for this site despite the obnoxious posts. Fair is fair whether I agree or not...

[4est]

7 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

How so?  Can you elaborate?

 

As I see it, the issue is not incivility.  Now perhaps you're suggesting that some on the forum are taking some pleasure in seeing others on the forum unhappy about something.  I suppose this is not completely unexpected.

 

If this is the basis of the "double standard" you're alluding to, by all means step up and own it.

 

If WD is merely a troll sent here to torment a certain faction of forum members, then bravo!  I didn't see that coming.

 

But to me, it's indistinguishable from an intentional, deliberate, guerilla marketing campaign.

Step up and own it? Can you even hear yourself I have to wonder... WTF

 

In the Civility thread you made it seem as if it was alright to say whatever however you wanted to in order to "defend" what you see is the truth. I do not agree with the stance. Here you are expressing that WD is pushing an agenda and should be banned for his deliberate campaign. I see very little difference even though I am completely against MQA. And so, if you have the "right" (that you almost treat as a duty or cause), why should it be different for WD just because he supports something that you(and I) entirely reject? In both cases it smells of zealotry to me. You both think you are correct and the ends justify the means. Honestly, he has been more polite about it, not that you care.

[4est]

35 minutes ago, Nikhil said:

 

Shunyata is Sanskrit.  Very clever name IMO if one understands the nuance of the term.

 

 

Care to elaborate on that nuance? I am curious, not baiting you. TYIA

[4est]

3 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

Im guessing you missed most of his posts and the post where I offered to meet him in Los Angeles because I was sure we got off on the wrong foot. 

 

I dont think we need to rehash his banning, it’s all documented above. Although it was strange that a 50 year old Brian Lucey called me old because of my musical taste that includes many of the albums he touched and the fact that I’m in my early 40s. 

Yes, it was a bit of a cluster. Personally, I would have liked to see him get a little more slack from the pile on. He had strong opinions and stated them a bit forcibly, but he also had much to offer if we could have had it all toned down a bit.

[4est]

14 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

There are many more reasons why "professionals" chose to participate in forums than meets the eye. 

 

Where do you think Bob Stuart would rather talk about MQA, a forum that's heavily moderated where he is viewed with elevated status, or a forum where people like mansr and miska will ask him very technical and challenging questions that he may not want to answer?

Yes, but it you are cherry picking two of the most knowledgeable posters on this site. There are many others here that just froth at the mouth. IIRC, people were all over him about DR when he repeatedly stated it was not his decision. Sure his answers were rough, but what do you expect him to do- spend hours attempting to defend his livelihood to a bunch of hobbyists while alienating his clientele? I felt for him. I work in the custom home industry, and I'd hate to have to defend myself for the products that I make. Like him, I am just a cog in the wheel controlled by others.

[4est]

28 minutes ago, knickerhawk said:

 

Yes, I'm well aware of that line of argument. I now how it goes...trojan horse and all that...but so far it's only given me more choices. 

More choices? The other day upon his death I was trying to listen to Tom Petty and the Redbook files wouldn't play. I was stuck with MQA versions. I just tried again, and his first album is still that way on Tidal. I fear this is the beginning...

[4est]

31 minutes ago, mansr said:

Heartbreaking.

It was the only example I could think of at the moment. Despite ones musical preferences, he is a major artist and it was a wake up call for me in that MQA might just replace RB. It will be a shame as Tidal integrates well into my set up with HQPlayer.

[4est]

1 minute ago, mansr said:

Do I really have to explain the joke?

Of course not. I probably just read too far into it. All of this MQA conspiracy stuff has me on edge! LOL I have to wonder if this isn't happening to other mainstream artists there. I listen to mostly less popular stuff.

[4est]

6 minutes ago, rickca said:

Once you get more experience with better cables, you will change your tune about the impact they can have on sound.

You pulled exactly the same stuff here on CA with @Shadders, and you brought it up, not him.

Regardless, can we please not dilute this with cable discussions. They really have nothing to do with MQA and it is just a diversion.

[4est]

15 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

Please stop taking things out of context. This was in response to Agitator claiming that he cannot hear differences between cables.

 

And it is also established that higher resolving systems do highlight differences from equipment changes as well as format differences, all else being equal.

What context? You have failed to present anything of substance to the questions you have been asked. One doesn't need a "resolving" system to understand that there has yet to be a compelling reason why MQA is required to perform the simple filters used by it. It is not "authenticated", it is not hi res, it is not elegant, it is not smaller than FLAK and AFAIK, it is not even new. How about you provide something tangible to prevent us from simply feeling you are a spokesperson?