MQA is Vaporware

[Fair Hedon]

Oldie but a goodie...totally desperate move to repost this.

 

https://www.audiostream.com/content/mqa-reviewed

 

"Listening to Nina Simone sing "No Me Quitte Pas" is always special. I own the 24/96 version of I Put A Spell On You and the LP so I'm familiar with this record. Using the Meridian Prime, I first queued up the regular old 24/96 file, followed by the MQA-encoded version and when Ms. Simone sang out in MQA, she'd moved. Or, more precisely, Ms. Simone took up a more believable and solid place right of center as compared to her more diffuse 24/96 image that kinda sounded as if floated more centered between the speakers, still a bit right, but not as obviously so. 

 

But that's not the only difference. The entire space of the recording opened up, unfolded?, into a more realistic-sounding space; more relaxed, more air, greater ease. Coupled with this improved spatial information, which I'd classify as RFO (Really Fucking Obvious), instruments took up a more solid position within this improved space and they sounded subtly ever that much sweeter."

 

What a hoot.

 

[FredericV]

2 minutes ago, Fair Hedon said:

This was established early on when he was confronted with the fact he was an Admin of a private industry MQA Facebook group which he denie, until confronted with a screen shot. He spun it like nobody's business and claimed it was an "enthusiasts" group..sure..with dealers, and reviewers and manufacturers, and Bob Stuart himself as members.

 

Before the secret group existed, the owner of this group wrote that he needed to defend MQA and speak out:

Plausible deniability that he is NOT a paid shill? He indeed added Scoggins to the group.

Do normal fanboys use the term "team"?

 

Peter's wingman is this guy, and one of the earliest members of the secret group:

Looking at the amount of posts in the secret group by Peter Veth and here at CA before he was banned, he must either be compensated to do this, or be an extreme fanboy / believer willing to take the risk of getting fired on his dayjob (which is not related to MQA or audio / hifi ) when the bulk volume of posts interfering with his dayjob would be exposed to his employer.
 

 

[beetlemania]

19 minutes ago, Fair Hedon said:

Oldie but a goodie...totally desperate move to repost this.

Over on audioasylum, I asked LaVorgna for examples of " valid level-matched A/B comparisons ". He never replied but Charles Hansen weighed in on Lavorgna article you linked:

Quote

It's (conveniently for Bob Stuart) never been done as far as I can tell. Probably the closest were the ones done by Michael Lavorgna in his article (linked below).

In this case, ML had MQA process songs with which he was already familiar - a vastly better starting point for this type of comparison than normal MQA demos. It's unclear if Michael checked to ensure that the processed files were level matched to within ±0.1 dB, which would be necessary for the most accurate results.

The biggest problem with ML's test was that he was only able to properly compare files on two relatively low-performance DACs - the Meridian Explorer2 ($299) and the Mytek Brookly ($2000, but at least 1/3 of that goes towards all kinds of features aimed at "pro studio" - the kind in the teenager's basement - analog preamp, headphone amp, even a MM/MC phono input, not to mention 6 different digital inputs). Both are decent sounding for the money and considering the features they offer, but hardly "state of the art".

 

[Samuel T Cogley]

20 minutes ago, Fair Hedon said:

It is such a shame the Troll Scoggins still has a venue.

 

I'm thinking two, as he still keeps a toe in the water over here.  I'm beginning to see that the thread over on Daddy's forum was meant originally as a counterbalance to this thread.  I have a good friend who's a dealer of high end gear who has lots of contacts at various manufacturers.  This very thread is a huge source of agita for some of them, and most want to see it gone or at least fall off the front page of the general section.

 

Have you noticed that no gorts have intervened in that thread?  Only Daddy himself.  I've never seen a thread get such a white glove treatment.  I think Hoffman is between a rock and a hard place.  He wants to be seen as friendly to industry, but that thread does no favors for MQA.  It's only Scoggins, though another old timer, "Mal", tried feebly to defend/support Scoggins with a few posts and left.  Everyone else is skeptical of Scoggin's motives and loyalties.  Daddy sticks with his mantra, "MQA, don't care".

 

Veterans of Hoffman forums know Scoggins and his famously specious claims.  Here's just one example of some back and forth from 2011:

 

Quote

I have been experimenting with AIFF and Apple Lossless files on my portable rig. AIFF sounds a bit better on my iPod.

As a result I am ripping CDs in AIFF now.

 

Forum veteran "Vidiot" can't let this go unanswered:

Quote

 

I'm very skeptical about this.

If you want to try to compare the files yourself on your computer, use one of these two free programs:

ABXer for Mac OSX

Foobar2000 for Windows

Each will let you compare one file with another, which is very helpful for determining real differences in an A/B test. The guys on the Hydrogen Audio Forums are adamant that lossless is lossess. A WAV file is identical to Windows Media Lossless, Apple Lossless, FLAC, AIFF, and everything else. My opinion is that any difference you think you hear is imaginary, but I concede that the mind can be fooled under certain conditions. If you're hearing a real difference, something's wrong with the system.

 

 

Scoggins never hesitates to name drop to back up his claims:

 

Quote

I'm not sure why AIFF but I know it does. It may be that the iPod works better with AIFF. Maybe it has to do with the unpacking of the lossless file on the fly.

P.S. Several prominent audiophiles have noticed this as well including John Atkinson, Bob Harley and others.

 

Someone makes a subtle note about the name dropping:

 

Quote

If they weren't prominent, which is a position they achieve by articulating the differences they hear which others do not (and which does not mean they exist), they would be a anomaly in the data set.

 

Scoggins then elevates himself to the level of Atkinson and Harley without even blinking:

 

Quote

Why do you discredit what we are hearing?

What evidence do you have to prove we are wrong to hear the AIFF-ALAC differences?

 

And as you would expect, the thread goes off the rails.  This is just one example.

 

The makeup of active posters on Hoffman has changed over the years as new blood with more vigor has pushed aside the fogies.  But some loyalties endure and Daddy is in no hurry to nix Scoggins' war on the MQA skeptics.

[Fair Hedon]

42 minutes ago, FredericV said:

 

Before the secret group existed, the owner of this group wrote that he needed to defend MQA and speak out:

Plausible deniability that he is NOT a paid shill? He indeed added Scoggins to the group.

Do normal fanboys use the term "team"?

 

Peter's wingman is this guy, and one of the earliest members of the secret group:

Looking at the amount of posts in the secret group by Peter Veth and here at CA before he was banned, he must either be compensated to do this, or be an extreme fanboy / believer willing to take the risk of getting fired on his dayjob (which is not related to MQA or audio / hifi ) when the bulk volume of posts interfering with his dayjob would be exposed to his employer.
 

 

Yes, thanks for reposting this...the evidence is clear cut.

[Fair Hedon]

39 minutes ago, beetlemania said:

Over on audioasylum, I asked LaVorgna for examples of " valid level-matched A/B comparisons ". He never replied but Charles Hansen weighed in on Lavorgna article you linked:

 

...and what makes Lasagna's "comparisons" even more bogus is we now know the MyTek applied MQA filtering to everything unless the user manually goes into the menu, which I highly doubt Lasagna did, since he has been utterly clueless from the start.

[Fair Hedon]

10 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

I'm thinking two, as he still keeps a toe in the water over here.  I'm beginning to see that the thread over on Daddy's forum was meant originally as a counterbalance to this thread.  I have a good friend who's a dealer of high end gear who has lots of contacts at various manufacturers.  This very thread is a huge source of agita for some of them, and most want to see it gone or at least fall off the front page of the general section.

 

Have you noticed that no gorts have intervened in that thread?  Only Daddy himself.  I've never seen a thread get such a white glove treatment.  I think Hoffman is between a rock and a hard place.  He wants to be seen as friendly to industry, but that thread does no favors for MQA.  It's only Scoggins, though another old timer, "Mal", tried feebly to defend/support Scoggins with a few posts and left.  Everyone else is skeptical of Scoggin's motives and loyalties.  Daddy sticks with his mantra, "MQA, don't care".

 

Veterans of Hoffman forums know Scoggins and his famously specious claims.  Here's just one example of some back and forth from 2011:

 

 

Forum veteran "Vidiot" can't let this go unanswered:

 

Scoggins never hesitates to name drop to back up his claims:

 

 

Someone makes a subtle note about the name dropping:

 

 

Scoggins then elevates himself to the level of Atkinson and Harley without even blinking:

 

 

And as you would expect, the thread goes off the rails.  This is just one example.

 

The makeup of active posters on Hoffman has changed over the years as new blood with more vigor has pushed aside the fogies.  But some loyalties endure and Daddy is in no hurry to nix Scoggins' war on the MQA skeptics.

 

You bring up some excellent points..and the white gloving, as you call it, of that thread is very, very curious.

 

My Brian Lucey thread was shut down about over a dozen pages. But Lying Lee gets to continue to make a mockery

of the place. Again, very curious.

 

I had numerous industry participants identify Scoggie as name dropping sycophant years ago.

[firedog]

1 hour ago, beetlemania said:

The biggest problem with ML's test was that he was only able to properly compare files on two relatively low-performance DACs - the Meridian Explorer2 ($299) and the Mytek Brookly ($2000, but at least 1/3 of that goes towards all kinds of features aimed at "pro studio" - the kind in the teenager's basement - analog preamp, headphone amp, even a MM/MC phono input, not to mention 6 different digital inputs).

Don't agree with this at all. If MQA is what it is claimed, then even the ME2 should be more than good enough to reveal it. The Brooklyn is a good DAC. At least one feature he refers to is an optional add-on. It's way more than good enough for the purpose. 

Sorry, but that quote is real audiophile snobbery.

[beetlemania]

10 minutes ago, firedog said:

Sorry, but that quote is real audiophile snobbery.

Did you read the entire linked post?

[firedog]

22 minutes ago, beetlemania said:

Did you read the entire linked post?

yes.

[Archimago]

Probably not unreasonable to consider that maybe ML is resurrecting that old blog post because his material is becoming less and less relevant and insightful.

 

Must "cash in" on all the clicks being dedicated to MQA on forums perhaps!?

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

4 minutes ago, Archimago said:

Probably not unreasonable to consider that maybe ML is resurrecting that old blog post because his material is becoming less and less relevant and insightful.

 

Must "cash in" on all the clicks being dedicated to MQA on forums perhaps!?

 

I’m sure people will take the bait and comment up a storm. 

[MikeyFresh]

2 hours ago, Fair Hedon said:

Oldie but a goodie...totally desperate move to repost this.

 

https://www.audiostream.com/content/mqa-reviewed

 

I too thought this looked quite desperate, so much so that I read through it just to be sure there wasn't actually some sort of new information, technical explanation, or other angle being presented.

 

Alas, nothing of the sort, just an old rehash complete with original BS about the MQA blue light indicating provenance and sign-off/approval by the artist/producer after careful listening, and that MQA corrects for timing anomalies introduced by both the A/D and D/A processes, based on the specific devices used at either end.

 

What a total crock, and ML seems to think it's as easy as couching the whole thing all over again in a "this is a listening focused review" type vein and so somehow that makes it worth "bumping up to the present".

 

That "review" is just as much an MQA industry-stance regurgitation today as it was in 2016, nothing new to see, just move along.

[MikeyFresh]

6 minutes ago, Archimago said:

Must "cash in" on all the clicks being dedicated to MQA on forums perhaps!?

 

Yes while they gettin' is still pretty good, but it can't last forever.

[Archimago]

6 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I’m sure people will take the bait and comment up a storm. 

 

I'm sure that thought has crossed many minds. Just sayin'.

 

Oh yeah... Plus the fact that he banned so many people from posting comments. Imagine if he could have had hundreds of responses to a post like that and the thousands of eyeballs adding to the discussion. Alas, opportunity lost... Such is the price of monetization through pure advertising.

 

[firedog]

https://www.audioasylum.com/forums/critics/messages/8/87573.html

[Fair Hedon]

The MQA Lap Dog just posted this at Hoffman, and defies belief:

 

"I had an interesting conversation this afternoon with David Chesky. Much of it was off the record but one thing I can talk about stood out to me.

David has devised a test of his own 24/192k recordings (using reference ADCs and DACs from MSB). He can play both the master file non-MQA at 24/192 and then stream on HDMusicStreaming (his upcoming all-MQA streaming service) the same file unfolded at 24/192. Being super connected in the music biz, he then has invited experienced engineers, even those who don't like it. He says even the anti-MQA engineers cannot tell a difference between the master file and the MQA streamed 24/192 file.

If it's so close that experienced sound engineers cannot hear it, a lot of this discussion seems a bit academic."

 

So if "experienced engineers cannot tell the difference between MQA and a master file, MQA is moot, and pointless, which we all know already.. And it confirms that Atkinson, Lavorgna, Harley, Austin, Darko etc have all been lying or they cannot hear properly.

[Fair Hedon]

44 minutes ago, MikeyFresh said:

 

I too thought this looked quite desperate, so much so that I read through it just to be sure there wasn't actually some sort of new information, technical explanation, or other angle being presented.

 

Alas, nothing of the sort, just an old rehash complete with original BS about the MQA blue light indicating provenance and sign-off/approval by the artist/producer after careful listening, and that MQA corrects for timing anomalies introduced by both the A/D and D/A processes, based on the specific devices used at either end.

 

What a total crock, and ML seems to think it's as easy as couching the whole thing all over again in a "this is a listening focused review" type vein and so somehow that makes it worth "bumping up to the present".

 

That "review" is just as much an MQA industry-stance regurgitation today as it was in 2016, nothing new to see, just move along.

An amazingly precise and accurate summation. 

 

I can't imagine anybody could see it differently.

[Rt66indierock]

4 minutes ago, Fair Hedon said:

The MQA Lap Dog just posted this at Hoffman, and defies belief:

 

"I had an interesting conversation this afternoon with David Chesky. Much of it was off the record but one thing I can talk about stood out to me.

David has devised a test of his own 24/192k recordings (using reference ADCs and DACs from MSB). He can play both the master file non-MQA at 24/192 and then stream on HDMusicStreaming (his upcoming all-MQA streaming service) the same file unfolded at 24/192. Being super connected in the music biz, he then has invited experienced engineers, even those who don't like it. He says even the anti-MQA engineers cannot tell a difference between the master file and the MQA streamed 24/192 file.

If it's so close that experienced sound engineers cannot hear it, a lot of this discussion seems a bit academic."

 

So if "experienced engineers cannot tell the difference between MQA and a master file, MQA is moot, and pointless. And it confirms that Atkinson, Lavorgna, Harley, Austin, Darko etc have all been lying or they cannot hear properly.

 

Also academic then are the comments then that MQA sounds better than the master. David Chesky just confirmed it doesn't sound better. Berkeley Audio Designs Michael Ritter and I went back and forth a bit on The Absolute Sound site and he said they found the 24/192 file still sounds better than MQA but it was close.

 

[Indydan]

2 hours ago, Archimago said:

Probably not unreasonable to consider that maybe ML is resurrecting that old blog post because his material is becoming less and less relevant and insightful.

 

Must "cash in" on all the clicks being dedicated to MQA on forums perhaps!?

 

 

 

Or maybe, he was pissed off to be on my chart! 

 

 

MQA "enthusiast"                        Reason for no longer posting on CA

Peter Veth                                                          BANNED

WitchDoctor                                                      BANNED

Lee Scoggins                            DISTRACTED by jumping between forums

Michael Lavorgna                    BANNED for telling someone to go fuck his mother

 

 

[Fair Hedon]

1 hour ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Also academic then are the comments then that MQA sounds better than the master. David Chesky just confirmed it doesn't sound better. Berkeley Audio Designs Michael Ritter and I went back and forth a bit on The Absolute Sound site and he said they found the 24/192 file still sounds better than MQA but it was close.

 

Pree Cisely.

 

We now know that MQA "saving bandwidth" is total bollocks

 

We now know that MQA being artist authenticated is absolute tripe

 

We now know that MQA sounds "no better' than the master file, in fact worse most of the time.

 

Why is MQA not being liquidated?

 

I wonder if Scoggins knows how stupid his post really is. He has fallen into every trap set for him so far..

 

 

 

[Fair Hedon]

Hansen really disgraced himself with some very personal attacks on Stuart. Friends say he was in a great deal of pain near the end of his life but still. Several prominent audio leaders have expressed to me that they lost a good bit of respect for the man"

 

Lee Scoggins..

 

Mr. Scoggins YOU are a DISGRACE.

[Lee Scoggins]

5 hours ago, Fair Hedon said:

It is such a shame the Troll Scoggins still has a venue.

 

On Hoofman, he has even been flat accused by being a financially compensated MQA operative.

 

The fact is he is a LIAR,

 

This was established early on when he was confronted with the fact he was an Admin of a private industry MQA Facebook group which he denie, until confronted with a screen shot. He spun it like nobody's business and claimed it was an "enthusiasts" group..sure..with dealers, and reviewers and manufacturers, and Bob Stuart himself as members.

 

Right at that point he was exposed as a disingenuous liar with no credibility.  And the lies continue until this day.

 

This is total bullshit.  I explained what happened in detail. Peter Veth added me to the group as an admin without my permission as Facebook inexplicably allows. It took me a week to realize I was an admin at which point I immediately complained to Peter that I did not want to be an admin but I would participate as a member for learning reasons.

 

Also, this is just Peter’s page.  I have not seen any of the MQA team post on the page.

[Fair Hedon]

1 minute ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

This is total bullshit.  I explained what happened in detail. Peter Veth added me to the group as an admin without my permission as Facebook inexplicably allows. It took me a week to realize I was an admin at which point I immediately complained to Peter that I did not want to be an admin but I would participate as a member for learning reasons.

 

Also, this is just Peter’s page.  I have not seen any of the MQA team post on the page.

Sorry, your spin is meaningless. You denied even being part of the group. You are done.

[mansr]

7 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

learning reasons

That was funny. Got any more jokes?