MQA is Vaporware

[Archimago]

4 hours ago, crenca said:

 

1)  Will Austin actually talk about facts as opposed to his own subjective impressions?

A:  Only the "facts" of so much of audiophiledom, the assertions of this or that product/company.  For example he will use terms like "Hi Res" without any definition, not bothering to explain that MQA is in fact a lossy facsimile of actual Hi Res PCM.  Bit depth will be something "perceived", and math will have nothing to do with it.

 

2)  Will he just call up a bunch of people to interview as if having a bunch of voices on the "pro" side carries much weight in the face of objective analysis?

A:  Yes, but he will also glue bits and pieces of these interviews together in what appears to be a coherent and believable story of MQA.  He is a storyteller first and foremost, and has to tow the line of his pro-MQA, anti consumer publication

 

3) Will he bother presenting the opinions of those who voice objections against MQA?

A:  Yes, in a negative light and then he will repeat the unverifiable marketing verbiage of MQA.  What else can he do?  How MQA really works is behind the black box of IP/DRM.

 

4)Will he/Stereophile create their own diagrams and illustrations independently or run images and ideas fed to them by MQA Ltd. / Bob Stuart?

A:  No, only MQA supplied information of any kind.  What other kind of information is there besides pro-consumer based reverse engineering? As a likely NDA signor (and certainly working for those who are) he is not even allowed to do otherwise.

 

5)Will they actually bother to do their own blind testing with some kind of controls?

A:  No

 

 

 

 

 

Okay Crenca,

 

The bets are down. Let's see if this is exactly what the article series ends up looking like .

 

Semente: Yup. Someone's getting paid...

 

 

[Lee Scoggins]

On 11/13/2017 at 3:36 PM, FredericV said:

 

 

It seems reviewer Lee Scoggins (reviewer for Part-Time Audiophile) is now also a moderator of the closed MQA group:



Also mentioned on Steve Hoffman forums:
http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/mastering-engineer-brian-lucey-rips-mqa.711977/page-10#post-17536912

Why does a reviewer need to manage a closed facebook group? It looks like all of the MQA lobbyists are in it together.

 

 

 

Hi Frederic,

 

Lee Scoggins here.  I just joined but have lurked around CA for several years and, in fact, sat next to Chris Connaker at Rocky Mountain in the Wilson/Constellation room.   I think the Alexia 2s impressed both of us.  

 

Allow me to clear up a few things...

 

1. Peter Veth added me as a moderator without my prior permission but with the good intent of having me add some of my friends in to grow the group. No nefarious intent or conspiracy here.  Many closed groups exist to facilitate spam control.

 

2.  I was removed as a moderator today as I don't have the time and I have not fully made up my mind on MQA.

 

3.  I do classical recordings and I plan to ask Bob Stuart or Mehow (Mytek) if they can encode a recording I did with the Texas Guitar Quartet.  That will allow me to do a more thorough and meaningful comparison.

 

4.  I have been impressed with two MQA demos I heard, one set up on a listening station at Mytek's Axpona booth and the demo that Peter McGrath and Bob Stuart did at the LA Audio Show.  The MQA encoded files sounded better to my ears in each instance.

 

So I am now on the forum here and I am still exploring the pros and cons of MQA encoding.  I hope these comments are helpful.  Let me know if you have any questions.

 

Thanks,

Lee

[Brian Lucey]

2 hours ago, Lee Scoggins said:

3.  I do classical recordings and I plan to ask Bob Stuart or Mehow (Mytek) if they can encode a recording I did with the Texas Guitar Quartet.  That will allow me to do a more thorough and meaningful comparison.

 

4.  I have been impressed with two MQA demos I heard, one set up on a listening station at Mytek's Axpona booth and the demo that Peter McGrath and Bob Stuart did at the LA Audio Show.  The MQA encoded files sounded better to my ears in each instance.

 

So I am now on the forum here and I am still exploring the pros and cons of MQA encoding.  I hope these comments are helpful.  Let me know if you have any questions.

 

Thanks,

Lee

 

HI Lee,

 

Sounded "better to my ears in each instance" ... than what?

[mansr]

6 minutes ago, Brian Lucey said:

Sounded "better to my ears in each instance" ... than what?

The mp3 reference played 1 dB lower, no doubt.

[Lee Scoggins]

9 minutes ago, Brian Lucey said:

 

HI Lee,

 

Sounded "better to my ears in each instance" ... than what?

 

Than the non-MQA files.

[Fokus]

8 hours ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 The MQA encoded files sounded better to my ears in each instance.

 

Better enough to warrant the creation of landfill?

 

Better enough to obsolete present-day DSP-enabled systems?

 

Better enough in a way that a mastering professional cannot achieve with regular tools?

 

[Lee Scoggins]

18 minutes ago, Fokus said:

 

Better enough to warrant the creation of landfill?

 

Better enough to obsolete present-day DSP-enabled systems?

 

Better enough in a way that a mastering professional cannot achieve with regular tools?

 

 

No way to answer this as those are business questions.

[Brian Lucey]

6 hours ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

Than the non-MQA files.

 

Was that the actual master file?  What was the resolution and source?

 

Was it "better" enough to stop all future innovation in filtering and for the world to pay MQA a royalty for every transaction using this one piece of tech .... for all time?

[firedog]

2 hours ago, Fokus said:

 

Better enough to warrant the creation of landfill?

 

Lee came here with a reasonable post and obviously good intentions. Why do we have to answer him with such a tone?  I'm sorry, there's and edge to this post that isn't warranted.

Do we have to be negative to every industry professional that posts here and drive them away?

[mansr]

1 hour ago, firedog said:

Lee came here with a reasonable post and obviously good intentions.

I guess you didn't see the he mess he made on the Steve Hoffman forum a while ago. The thread appears to have been removed, so I can't link to it.

[rwdvis]

12 hours ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

Hi Frederic,

 

Lee Scoggins here.  I just joined but have lurked around CA for several years and, in fact, sat next to Chris Connaker at Rocky Mountain in the Wilson/Constellation room.   I think the Alexia 2s impressed both of us.  

 

Allow me to clear up a few things...

 

1. Peter Veth added me as a moderator without my prior permission but with the good intent of having me add some of my friends in to grow the group. No nefarious intent or conspiracy here.  Many closed groups exist to facilitate spam control.

 

2.  I was removed as a moderator today as I don't have the time and I have not fully made up my mind on MQA.

 

3.  I do classical recordings and I plan to ask Bob Stuart or Mehow (Mytek) if they can encode a recording I did with the Texas Guitar Quartet.  That will allow me to do a more thorough and meaningful comparison.

 

4.  I have been impressed with two MQA demos I heard, one set up on a listening station at Mytek's Axpona booth and the demo that Peter McGrath and Bob Stuart did at the LA Audio Show.  The MQA encoded files sounded better to my ears in each instance.

 

So I am now on the forum here and I am still exploring the pros and cons of MQA encoding.  I hope these comments are helpful.  Let me know if you have any questions.

 

Thanks,

Lee

This is an obvious setup.  Pretending to be undecided, neutral and unbiased.  I’ll bet a million he comes back with a positive and glowing assessment of MQA.  It’s already been scripted.  Don't be so gullible, people.

 

“exploring the pros and cons”

"I have not fully made up my mind on MQA."

 

LOL.

[rwdvis]

1 hour ago, firedog said:

Lee came here with a reasonable post and obviously good intentions. Why do we have to answer him with such a tone?  I'm sorry, there's and edge to this post that isn't warranted.

Do we have to be negative to every industry professional that posts here and drive them away?

The tone was deserved.  Lee knew exactly what Brian was asking and Lee answered dishonestly.  Don’t be so naive.

[asdf1000]

Does anyone know if Xstream is actually MQA? Or something entirely different?

 

Xstream will be designed to be adaptive, and stream in the highest quality a user's connection will allow.

 

"Xstream is one file, streaming for all with 15,000 seamlessly changing levels of playback quality," Young said.

 

Old April 2017 article here: https://www.cnet.com/news/pono-is-probably-dead-long-live-xstream/

 

Edit: more Googling says it's different.

 

"That effort has led to a technology developed by Orastream, a small company in Singapore that we’ve been working with. Together we created Xstream, the next generation of streaming, an adaptive streaming service that changes with available bandwidth. It is absolutely amazing because it is capable of complete high resolution playback."

 

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/neil-young-preps-new-high-quality-streaming-service-xstream-w478281

 

[Fokus]

2 hours ago, firedog said:

with such a tone?  I'm sorry, there's and edge to this post that isn't warranted.

 

No tone, and no negativity intended.

 

The questions are genuine: if someone thinks this really sounds better, then one wants to know if the quality difference really is worth the consequences of adopting this format: the wholesale dumping of incompatible DACs and DSP gear.

 

Apart from this ... censeo MQAm delendam esse, yes.

 

 

[#Yoda#]

32 minutes ago, Em2016 said:

Does anyone know if Xstream is actually MQA? Or something entirely different?

 

Xstream will be designed to be adaptive, and stream in the highest quality a user's connection will allow.

 

"Xstream is one file, streaming for all with 15,000 seamlessly changing levels of playback quality," Young said.

 

Old April 2017 article here: https://www.cnet.com/news/pono-is-probably-dead-long-live-xstream/

 

Edit: more Googling says it's different.

 

"That effort has led to a technology developed by Orastream, a small company in Singapore that we’ve been working with. Together we created Xstream, the next generation of streaming, an adaptive streaming service that changes with available bandwidth. It is absolutely amazing because it is capable of complete high resolution playback."

 

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/neil-young-preps-new-high-quality-streaming-service-xstream-w478281

 

 

If XStream will ever appear, what is quite doubtful, it has nothing to do with MQA.

 

XStream is based on a streaming technology, developed by OraStream that can stream many different formats in their original resolution and adapt the signal to the  available bandwidth at the receiving device. That means, if you are at home with a proper internet access, you can get e.g. FLAC 24/192 or on the other hand, when you listen to your mobile device in the outback, the signal is adapted to current available bandwith, e.g. 128 kbps.

http://www.orastream.com

 

[asdf1000]

11 minutes ago, #Yoda# said:

If XStream will ever appear, what is quite doubtful, it has nothing to do with MQA.

 

Hi, yes, I know. I quoted the same about the Singaporean company.

 

It looks like Neil's discog will stream using Xtream here soon: http://www.neilyoungarchives.com/

 

Next month apparently.

 

 

[#Yoda#]

2 minutes ago, Em2016 said:

 

It looks like Neil's discog will stream using Xtream here soon: http://www.neilyoungarchives.com/

 

Next month apparently.

 

 

 

That is correct, but the Neil Young Archives seems to be very different in the available catalog to what was announced as XStream a view months ago. It simply uses the same technology.

[asdf1000]

1 minute ago, #Yoda# said:

 

That is correct, but the Neil Young Archives seems to be very different in the available catalog to what was announced as XStream a view months ago. It simply uses the same technology.

 

Noted. It may be a starting point, for a larger catalog/library later.

 

Or might be a dead end. Let's see how it unfolds.

 

[synn]

50 minutes ago, Em2016 said:

Does anyone know if Xstream is actually MQA? Or something entirely different?

 

Xstream will be designed to be adaptive, and stream in the highest quality a user's connection will allow.

 

"Xstream is one file, streaming for all with 15,000 seamlessly changing levels of playback quality," Young said.

 

Old April 2017 article here: https://www.cnet.com/news/pono-is-probably-dead-long-live-xstream/

 

Edit: more Googling says it's different.

 

"That effort has led to a technology developed by Orastream, a small company in Singapore that we’ve been working with. Together we created Xstream, the next generation of streaming, an adaptive streaming service that changes with available bandwidth. It is absolutely amazing because it is capable of complete high resolution playback."

 

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/neil-young-preps-new-high-quality-streaming-service-xstream-w478281

 

 

 

Isn't this basically the first season of Silicon Valley?

[mansr]

1 hour ago, #Yoda# said:

If XStream will ever appear, what is quite doubtful, it has nothing to do with MQA.

 

XStream is based on a streaming technology, developed by OraStream that can stream many different formats in their original resolution and adapt the signal to the  available bandwidth at the receiving device. That means, if you are at home with a proper internet access, you can get e.g. FLAC 24/192 or on the other hand, when you listen to your mobile device in the outback, the signal is adapted to current available bandwith, e.g. 128 kbps.

http://www.orastream.com

So it's adaptive switching between encodings at different rates, just like every video streaming provider on the planet does.

[mav52]

2 hours ago, rwdvis said:

This is an obvious setup.  Pretending to be undecided, neutral and unbiased.  I’ll bet a million he comes back with a positive and glowing assessment of MQA.  It’s already been scripted.  Don't be so gullible, people.

 

“exploring the pros and cons”

"I have not fully made up my mind on MQA."

 

LOL.

Could this be another MQA spy, hum . 

[mansr]

9 minutes ago, mav52 said:

Could this be another MQA spy, hum . 

That's a rhetorical question, right?

[rickca]

1 hour ago, mav52 said:

Could this be another MQA spy, hum

Hey, we could plant our own spy in the MQA camp!  Then it would be spy vs spy like in Mad magazine.

[Fair Hedon]

I smell a shilly shill shill....

[mav52]

3 hours ago, mansr said:

That's a rhetorical question, right?

Ya think