MQA is Vaporware

[crenca]

1 minute ago, mansr said:

Little bits of aluminium rod sold at a 10 million percent markup.

 

I am the first (and second, and third) to support open forums such as this one.  They are the best defense I know of against the Audiophile Dark Arts such as MQA, thimbles full of "nanotechnology" and the like.  It's always best to get astroturfers folks like Lee Scoggins talking about what they really believe, and why they believe it.

 

That said, I do admit that I sometimes yearn for discussion that is not weighed down by such utter nonsense.

[kumakuma]

1 hour ago, daverich4 said:

 

A few? If you’re not on the “MQA is the crappiest sound to come out of a stereo in history” bandwagon when posting on this site you can expect to get piled on by a horde of anti-MQA vigilantes. Ralf even found it necessary to take a dig at MQA in a comment on your post about the new McIntosh gear. Mustn’t let any thread go by without at least one mention of how bad MQA is apparently. 

 

If you think people are opposed to MQA only because of the sound quality, you haven't been paying attention.

[KeenObserver]

1 hour ago, daverich4 said:

 

A few? If you’re not on the “MQA is the crappiest sound to come out of a stereo in history” bandwagon when posting on this site you can expect to get piled on by a horde of anti-MQA vigilantes. Ralf even found it necessary to take a dig at MQA in a comment on your post about the new McIntosh gear. Mustn’t let any thread go by without at least one mention of how bad MQA is apparently. 

 

Are you referring to the chorus of people that are pointing out that the Emperor has no clothes?  That's because THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES!

 

MQA is a fantastic scheme for the people making money from it.  It is absolute garbage for the music loving public

[KeenObserver]

Apparently, MQA is not dead yet.  The shills are still trying to poke it with a stick.

 

How horrible a proposition is MQA that the shills have to push it in  every forum?

[Hugo9000]

1 hour ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

Ralf, I use the Synergistic Research HFTs for room acoustics and it works well.  If you look closely, you will see them properly place in a grid patter on the walls, ceiling, and equipment & record racks.

 

I'm not sure what you are basing the "out of all proportion" comment on.  Peter said it was one of the better rooms had heard recently.  He is not one to make such comments lightly.

 

1 hour ago, Jud said:

 

We can certainly leave the pejoratives out of it. So I will just say your experience is at variance with mine.

 

@Rt66indierock's recent comment about changing the sound of the master might be a key here: I have heard MQA sound better than Redbook or hi res, but only where the master was obviously different.

 

1 hour ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

But in my last two demos, there were no mastering differences and I heard a clear improvement.

 

1 hour ago, Jud said:

 

Yes, that's the part of your experience that's at variance with mine.  ?

 

1 hour ago, crenca said:

 

Those are those thimbles full of "nano technology" if I am not mistaken...

 

LOL!  ?

And FINALLY we arrive at the crucial, missing piece of the puzzle!

 

So, all of you "science-y-type" folks and logical thinkers would never have dreamed of trying those marvelous HFTs with MQA, because:

a)  Well, duh, they were obviously developed and tuned to correct defects in pre-MQA audio technology, so who in his right mind would dream they could actually work correctly in conjunction with the deblurring and other corrective effects of MQA

b)  They didn't actually work with the pre-MQA technology that they were supposed to work with, so most of you just gave up on the things and put them completely out of mind ages ago

 

This is where it takes someone who thinks outside the box, or an idiot savant or something, who will just do things intuitively, disregarding the strictures of scientific method and logic and investigative protocols, rather like the serendipitous turn of events in those old and beloved commercials wherein a happy accident results from "you got chocolate in my peanut butter"/"you got your peanut butter on my chocolate."  Or like that time when Upjohn created minoxidil to treat ulcers, but found that while it was useless against ulcers, it was a great vasodilator when tested on dogs, so began trials to use it for hypertension, and then found that the only thing it was actually good for was certain types of hair regrowth, giving vain and insecure men the miracle that we know as Rogaine.

 

TL;DR:  Combine the deblurring effect of MQA with series 2 Wilson whatever-that-model-is (series 1 won't cut it) and its special time alignment with HFT's that by accident are tuned perfectly to enhance the MQA effect, and you get the miracle that Lee has been beating his head against the wall to share with us here.  Not just synergistic, but serendipitous!  Resulting truly in the birth of a new world!

[mansr]

2 minutes ago, Hugo9000 said:

Or the thing where Upjohn created minoxidil to treat ulcers, but found that while it was useless against ulcers, it was a great vasodilator when tested on dogs, so began trials to use it for hypertension, and then found that the only thing it was actually good for was certain types of hair regrowth, giving vain and insecure men the miracle that we know as Rogaine.

So basically MQA is equivalent to a dick pill scam.

[KeenObserver]

2 minutes ago, mansr said:

So basically MQA is equivalent to a dick pill scam.

 

Jeesus!  I spit my beer out!

 

Is that why Lee is so excited about MQA?

[rando]

1 hour ago, crenca said:

That said, I do admit that I sometimes yearn for discussion that is not weighed down by such utter nonsense.

 

This was the exact message being portrayed when we last conversed in here. 

[crenca]

32 minutes ago, mansr said:

So basically MQA is equivalent to a dick pill scam.

 

That really does sum it up.  I wonder if @The Computer Audiophilewould allow us to start a thread titled "Thimbles full of "nanotechnology", dick pill scams, boxes of rocks, and other things audiophiles fall for...."  You really can't make this stuff up ?

[Lee Scoggins]

30 minutes ago, crenca said:

 

That really does sum it up.  I wonder if @The Computer Audiophilewould allow us to start a thread titled "Thimbles full of "nanotechnology", dick pill scams, boxes of rocks, and other things audiophiles fall for...."  You really can't make this stuff up ?

 

Do you have any first-hand experience with HFTs?

[crenca]

1 minute ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

Do you have any first-hand experience with HFTs?

 

Why yes, yes I do.  Ted (Teddy to his friends I understand) himself gave me an almost personal demonstration once (me, and I don't know, 3 or 4 other old geezers).  His Magico's and VAC amps were making Eva Cassidy come alive, while he walked around the room moving his thimbles full of "nano-technology", one on the wall here, one near an old geezer there.  At one point he may or may not have had one on his forehead (you should try it - let us know how it "sounds"). He would move a couple, stop the music, and ask "can you hear the difference?".  The old geezers of course (being audiophiles) of course could, but then they probably also own beachfront property in Arizona.

 

I just smiled (avoiding the question).  Mostly because it was all so farcical (but of course your in the business of farcical...) but what I really wanted him to do was play some more Eva.

 

 

[Hugo9000]

What does HFT stand for?  Huckster Frequency Thimbles?  I'm just guessing here, can't be arsed to google it.

 

Similarly to extended "break in," which always results in positive changes over time, I'm astonished that these "devices" are "smart" enough to remove sonic defects, while leaving the actual musical information untouched.  Are there nanites inside, that are working collectively (like a hive mind?) to analyze the sound waves and compare against a database of musical scores and engineering/production notes/consulting the original artists to ensure that only the correct sound waves make it through to the listener?

[Ralf11]

23 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

Do you have any first-hand experience with HFTs?

 

Besides crenca's post, I will point out that one simply does not need "personal experience" to understand some things.

 

as one example, no scientist has  "personal experience" with mars, yet we understand quite a bit about it

 

but don't let me interrupt your idiotic claims Lee - you are reducing your credibility at a rapid rate

[KeenObserver]

4 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

 

Besides crenca's post, I will point out that one simply does not need "personal experience" to understand some things.

 

as one example, no scientist has  "personal experience" with mars, yet we understand quite a bit about it

 

but don't let me interrupt your idiotic claims Lee - you are reducing your credibility at a rapid rate

 

Credibility?

 

He's promoting MQA!

[KeenObserver]

There have been a number of systems and processes that have been adopted in the past that, with the passage of time, have been discovered to have been major mistakes.  If MQA is widely adopted, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that there will be many in the future that will realize that it was a major mistake.  There are many people, who have no financial stake in MQA, that have done their due diligence in studying MQA, that state that MQA is not all that it is suggested.  There are many, such as myself, that believe it would be a major mistake to adopt MQA.

 

The people most vocal in advocating for MQA are the people who stand to gain financially from MQA.

The people most vocal in opposing MQA are those people who stand to lose musically.

[mansr]

1 hour ago, Ralf11 said:

Besides crenca's post, I will point out that one simply does not need "personal experience" to understand some things.

I have plenty of personal experience with the physics of reality.

[Ralf11]

33 minutes ago, mansr said:

I have plenty of personal experience with the physics of reality.

 

of course, so do dogs, cats, insects, maple seeds...

[lucretius]

2 hours ago, mansr said:

I have plenty of personal experience with the physics of reality.

All roads lead back to the observer.

[Ralf11]

All toads lead back to the obscurer.

[MikeyFresh]

14 hours ago, Lee Scoggins said:

So I guess CA has reached a point in the MQA debate where a dissenting opinion is labelled propaganda.

 

Says the astroturfer whose propaganda poorly masquerades as opinion.

[FredericV]

Judging from the amount of MQA posts and replies at CA, it looks like MQA is almost dead.
Even in the secret master quack FB group they are now doing a lot of off-topic posts, like audiophile fuses.
Some are even leaving the group .... best decision ever!
 

[daverich4]

18 hours ago, KeenObserver said:

 

Are you referring to the chorus of people that are pointing out that the Emperor has no clothes?  That's because THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES!

 

MQA is a fantastic scheme for the people making money from it.  It is absolute garbage for the music loving public

 

Did you even bother reading my post before embarking on yet another anti-MQA rant? I questioned Chris’s statement that there were only a few anti-MQA posters on this site. It had absolutely nothing to do with the value of MQA one way or the other and yet you still rode in on your white horse to save us all from the nefarious scheme that is MQA. Thereby proving my point. 

[crenca]

2 hours ago, FredericV said:

Judging from the amount of MQA posts and replies at CA, it looks like MQA is almost dead.
Even in the secret master quack FB group they are now doing a lot of off-topic posts, like audiophile fuses.
Some are even leaving the group .... best decision ever!
 

 

I wonder if the proverbial last nail in the coffin will be when (if?) Qobuz gets up and running here in North America.  We very niche "hi res" folks will have another source of streaming =&>16/44 that is MQA free and likely more viable in the medium/long term.  Without a surprise move (something unlikely like a major streamer such as Spotify getting on board} how will MQA be foisted unto the consumer?  Maybe Tidal limps along through irrational investor exuberance and perhaps because they can offer more selection in the pop/rock/electronica genre's than Qobuz??

[Jud]

19 hours ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

Do you have any first-hand experience with HFTs?

 

Let me tell you about a first-hand experience with Synergistic's description of one of its products, then suggest something you might do with the HFTs if you're interested.

 

On the Audiostream website, one of the Synergistic products was being reviewed and discussed in the comments by various people including one of the Synergistic principals.  Looking at the Synergistic website, I noted a description of one of their cables, saying that zapping it with a couple of million volts from a Van de Graaff generator treated the cable through "a process called quantum tunneling."

 

I came back to Audiostream, and in the comments section noted that quantum tunneling occurs an uncountably infinite number of times in every tiniest bit of the universe every tiniest fraction of a second, and that zapping something with a Van de Graaff generator makes no difference to that.

 

The next time I came back to the Synergistic website, the copy read that the cable was treated by the Van de Graaff generator through "a process we call quantum tunneling."  Clever, eh?  Just appropriate an actual term from quantum physics and make it say whatever you want.

 

This has made me a bit skeptical - well, extremely skeptical, really - of other claims by Synergistic.

 

Now, the suggestion about the HFTs: Unlike potentially subtle variations of noise and timing within a DAC, for example, changes in the frequency and/or timing response of a listening room are liable to be fairly large and readily measurable with calibrated mics and room response measurement software.  Perhaps you'd like to do before and after room measurements with and without the HFTs?

[mansr]

9 minutes ago, Jud said:

Now, the suggestion about the HFTs: Unlike potentially subtle variations of noise and timing within a DAC, for example, changes in the frequency and/or timing response of a listening room are liable to be fairly large and readily measurable with calibrated mics and room response measurement software.  Perhaps you'd like to do before and after room measurements with and without the HFTs?

The thing about those thimbles is, due to their size, they can't have any effect on frequencies below about 25 kHz. At higher frequencies their effect is also practically nil since they occupy only a very tiny portion of the total wall area. As scams go, it's hard to find one more obvious.