MQA is Vaporware

[Samuel T Cogley]

10 minutes ago, Indydan said:

 

MQA declined to offer a response. That pretty much says it all. Garbage peddling cowards.

 

The MQA surrogates' narrative characterizes MQA critics as irrational, rude, and "armchair engineers", among other pejoratives.  To maintain that narrative, they must not respond directly to critics.

 

Personally, I expect to see MQA's "response" in a TEN imprint like Stereophile or Audiostream.  They are reliable MQA surrogates.

[Samuel T Cogley]

38 minutes ago, rando said:

 

I fear there exists a need to explain dry Midwestern humor and it's place.

 

One of the downsides to possessing a Jedi level of snark skill.  Sometimes your snark will be invisible to all but other Jedi 

[Samuel T Cogley]

1 hour ago, Indydan said:

 

While I was browsing another forum, I saw recent posts from Lee. I asked him February 27 if he would be coming back to CA with some answers. He has not replied... 

 

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?24817-Alpha-and-Delta-NR-VS-Zitron-and-Older-Line/page3

 

That thread is about Shunyata cables... 

[Samuel T Cogley]

1 minute ago, semente said:

 

Manufacturers and distributors tend to choose the same reviewer to "promote" their products and if you are paying 5-10k for advertising a year you want "results". Since there's an add on every other page, you can imagine how much power he really has as an editor.

The recommended products list is a farce, as are the best sound of show awards.

 

The whole concept of "awards" in the context of consumer products is nothing more than an attempt persuade the consumer that the "award winning" product will make the consumer a "winner" as well.  The value of consumer product "awards" is at best dubious.  But the marketing concept of "winning" is potent in consumerism.  Everyone wants to be a "winner".

[Samuel T Cogley]

12 hours ago, Fluffytime said:

I see Scoggins is back aboard the shill-train over on Hoffman's.

 

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/mqa-a-clever-stealth-drm-trojan-ccc-talk.735825/

 

This may seem counterintuitive to some, but this is Scoggins' way of getting that thread locked or deleted.  It's a well known tactic:  incite your critics by repeating the same thing over and over, tempers eventually flare, thread locked/deleted.

[Samuel T Cogley]

7 minutes ago, Indydan said:

 

Good point. I find that Scoggins defends MQA very strongly. A little too strongly. 

 

He keeps mentioning the same talking points over and over again. He also attacks Archimago's anonymity, rather than his analysis. 

 

It seems OK (for MQA enthusiasts like Lee) for MQA operatives like Peter Veth, to defend MQA using fake identities in forums. But, it's a big problem for these same people that Archimago remains anonymous for personal reasons.

 

Very hypocritical.

 

I think you have to give Scoggins more credit for knowing what he's doing in his MQA advocacy.  His continued diss of Archimago is just stoking the fires to get the thread nixed.

[Samuel T Cogley]

11 minutes ago, Fluffytime said:

 

Would not surprise me one bit. He's already managed to get at least two MQA threads wiped over there.

 

Recall that one was a thread that pointed to his gushingly pro-MQA Part Time Audiophile article (he created that thread).  I doubt Scoggins wanted that thread deleted (it was).  The thread he's posting in now is critical of MQA, and perhaps in his mind, having that thread deleted achieves some kind of "balance".

[Samuel T Cogley]

4 minutes ago, FredericV said:

So suppose he is not being paid, what would be the motivator to put so much effort in defending MQA, even at the risk of losing one's daytime job?

 

Don't know about you, but audiophilia has taught me that people in this world can get really emotional about extremely esoteric things. 

[Samuel T Cogley]

25 minutes ago, botrytis said:

LS believes what he read about MQA and nothing will change his mind other than these same writers going against it. I have seen this in this hobby. people believe all types of crazy things - Shun Mook Discs anyone?

 

LS fancies himself an expert of business, and especially audio business.  He infamously predicted roaring success of LH Labs crowd funding of the Geek Pulse and of LH Labs in general.  He was so completely and utterly wrong there that I actually feel a little embarrassed for him.  He's looking for a "win" now with MQA and he's "all in" with it.  His success as a business prognosticator (at least in his publicly available product) has been mixed at best.

[Samuel T Cogley]

8 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

By the way, if anyone wonders what gear I use, here is an article from CNET.

 

https://www.cnet.com/pictures/lees-audacious-high-end-audio-system-blows-the-doors-off/?query=audiophiliac

 

My clock says there's about 5 minutes left on that 15 minutes of fame Lee.  ?

 

I hope that notoriety is as fulfilling for you as it is for others.

[Samuel T Cogley]

Isn't the rub really that "factory" music production environments tend to want to standardize on formats (sample rates) that are the most portable and easiest for others to pick up should something happen whereas boutique audiophile music production is all about the provenance?  It's not laziness, it's all about the Benjamins!

[Samuel T Cogley]

4 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

Unfortunately I used LH Labs as an example of how consumer could save money.   They were financially healthy at the time and delivering product and well regarded for their flagship DAC.  Two years later things started to change but there was no way for anyone to foresee that.

 

Not exactly the history as I remember it.  Over at Hoffman, you devoted an entire thread to the rollout of your now infamous "Death Of A Sales Model" fan fiction.

 

Remember this thread that you started in *2013*?

 

Quote

This crowd funding campaign is on fire. Some really big additions and parts upgrades planned if the $1mm mark is met.

I have one on order with the Femto clock upgrade. I may do the linear power supply as well.

someone replies with some valid and surprisingly prescient concerns:

 

Quote

That remains to be seen. But it strikes me as the worst type of hype. I'm always leery when the hype comes that hot and heavy.

 

and you're always the reliable LHL advocate

 

Quote

In the video they list the parts they plan to use and they look pretty good to me. This is a fairly established firm as they sell the well regarded DaVinci DAC so I think its unlikely they won't ship the product.

Gavin is a pretty enthusiastic guy in person so that may come across as hype somewhat but in fact just enthusiasm over the product and the crowdfunding success.

 

You got everything you ordered, right?  LHL didn't leave you hanging like so many others?

 

[Samuel T Cogley]

23 minutes ago, Kyhl said:

I love the irony that you point out a study, which I haven't read but that's not the point here, trying to prove that higher bit rates are tied to resolution.

Juxtapose that with thought process with the reality that MQA reduces bit rate and yet you like the reduced bit rate of MQA.

 

In other words, while I agree with your point about bit rates adding resolution, you can't also agree with the second point that you like to sell that reduced resolution in MQA is also high resolution.

You can't have it both ways.

 

If his posting history here and at Hoffman is any predictor, he will certainly put effort into having it both ways.

[Samuel T Cogley]

Keep in mind that MQA only begrudgingly conceded that MQA was lossy after others reverse engineered (to some extent) the format.

 

In the culture of audiophilia, lossy compression is anathema.  MQA's first marketing thrust was that MQA was better than hirez PCM.

[Samuel T Cogley]

3 minutes ago, Tintinabulum said:

Wow, a lot of hate there. Thanks goodness there's some people out there protecting the public against this evil. Any other evils you lot conspire against?

 

I was going to purchase an iFI iDSD Pro until they jumped on the MQA bandwagon.  I bought a Benchmark DAC3 B instead and love it! 👍

[Samuel T Cogley]

1 hour ago, ARQuint said:

Does this comment add anything to the discussion?

 

Been wondering the same thing myself.  How exactly is Audiophile Style being served by having someone from The Absolute Sound here whose sole purpose seems to be to prop up Lee Scoggins' relentless MQA shilling?  Is The Absolute Sound really so invested in the success of MQA that they have seemingly permanent representatives in audio forums?

 

Now Mr. Quint is apparently trying to help Chris root out a "hater".  MQA is every bit the land grab we heard about when the rollout was still being presented as some kind of immaculate conception from Bob Stuart's brain.  And Mr. Quint can count me among those who see MQA's licensing "ecosystem" as having negative value for audiophiles.  In my humble opinion, "septic system" is being far, far too kind to MQA.

 

 

[Samuel T Cogley]

7 minutes ago, firedog said:

A bit unfair, I think. ARQ has been consistently polite here and has tried to further the discussion. He hasn't been a fanboy for MQA, unlike Lee. I'd agree that he does seem to have a heightened sensitivity to civility and tone-to the point of possibly not being able to read a post for content b/c of what he sees as a nasty tone.

 

Fair enough.  I'm still assuming that Quint is speaking for The Absolute Sound here.  Haven't seen any statement from The Absolute Sound disavowing his posts here.

[Samuel T Cogley]

15 hours ago, Jud said:

 

I wasn't thrilled about that, although you can install firmware that doesn't do DSD (and allows DSD512 into the bargain).  It's the reason I haven't "upgraded" to firmware that would eliminate my ability to upsample/convert to DSD512, while enabling MQA that I don't listen to.

 

I think you mean "although you can install firmware that doesn't do MQA" .  I have an iDSD Micro and a couple of iDAC2s.  Indeed, the MQA-enabled firmware kills the ability for DoP256 and that has been fairly well documented.  But the iDSD Pro is a different beast and to my knowledge, there is no way to apply non-MQA firmware or otherwise disable MQA functionality.

[Samuel T Cogley]

1 minute ago, firedog said:

My understanding is that on the iDSD pro iFi is one of the only manufacturers that has implemented MQA separately from non MQA. In other words, only MQA files are sent to the MQA filters. Regular PCM isn't. So there is only MQA functionality if you playback MQA.

AFAIK, dCS is the only other company to do this.

iFi said they spent considerable man hours building this functionality (software coding) into the DAC. It is only implemented in the iDSD Pro. With their other DACs your only choice for non MQA is to load the pre MQA firmware.
At least iFi is giving us a choice - the other manufacturers aren't.

 

I mostly agree, but purchasers of the iDSD Pro aren't given the choice to decline the MQA licensing fee.

[Samuel T Cogley]

18 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

The discussion after Chris left was pretty good.

 

I think Scoggins inadvertently proved everyone's point.

[Samuel T Cogley]

8 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

Nope.  The discussion at the end was a key part of it with lots of good information exchanged.

 

Wasn't the "discussion" comprised entirely of MQA employees and sycophants?

[Samuel T Cogley]

12 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

You are misleading here. I did not imply that good discussion was not possible with Chris in the room.

 

You said yourself that the discussion was "good" once all MQA dissent was removed from the room.  If this isn't a stark indication that you have a pro-MQA agenda, I don't know what is.

[Samuel T Cogley]

40 minutes ago, Sonicularity said:

 

Dissent is a bit harsh of a term.  What I saw were just objective discoveries that could have been discussed and possibly explained by some of those present in the audience.  Instead, we got a rant as Dick Cheney could expect at a Berkley graduation ceremony.

 

What I saw was an MQA contingent utterly unwilling to discuss anything technical and ham-handedly attempting to shoot all MQA skeptics with Cheney's (metaphoric of course) shotgun.  The amount of time the MQA people wanted to spend on Archimago's anonymity whilst actively avoiding any technical discussions of MQA was a big "tell" for me.  Those MQA guys are terrible poker players.

[Samuel T Cogley]

To anyone expecting Scoggins to actually engage in a back and forth regarding his allegations of bias in Chris' RMAF MQA slides, you might be left wanting.

 

Based on years of experience watching Scoggins posting in audio forums, I believe he will just level the accusation of bias and then go quiet until another opportunity to advocate for MQA presents itself in the forum (which pretty much summarizes his posting history here save for a few posts where he advocates shills for Shunyata, Audioquest, and Black Cat Cable).

 

I've never seen Scoggins engage in an actual debate.  In my humble opinion, he's using this forum to show the "captains of audio industry" that he is a reliable stooge.  And for those who believe the word "stooge" is inflammatory or otherwise "uncivil", I urge you to consult a dictionary.  I think you'll find it is apropos to the discussion.  And after that, if you're still uncomfortable with that word, perhaps "lickspittle" might be a bit more palatable. 😃

 

[Samuel T Cogley]

I'd just like to point out that Civility Scold is also a thing.  "Same scold, different robes" 😉

 

And as long as we're on about ad hominem, is it ad hominem when the target of ridicule is demonstrably a stooge or engages in disingenuous "internet influencer"  behavior?