MQA is Vaporware

[The Computer Audiophile]

17 minutes ago, Digital Assassin said:

However, this is not the story told at the beginning.

 

Here is John Atkinson quoted, with two totally untrue today fact:

 

As MQA needs to be applied at the mastering stage in a recording's production, it doesn't improve the sound quality of your existing CD collection. It is really only relevant to downloads.

 

https://www.stereophile.com/content/ive-heard-future-streaming-meridians-mqa#iVGw34mUHUGtC4bm.99

 

The story kept on changing, and keeps on changing to this day.

 

I hear what you're saying, but I'm not certain that's the best information to support your point :~) 

[Rt66indierock]

1 minute ago, rickca said:

Who provides MQA financial backing?  Is there a list of major shareholders?  I imagine it's private equity/venture capital firms, but who knows?  Maybe the labels themselves have taken a stake.

 

See beta House Companies. All the information you seek is public information. See the last page of the 2016 MQA  group reports and the 2015 Meridian Audio group report. 

[Digital Assassin]

2 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

I hear what you're saying, but I'm not certain that's the best information to support your point :~) 

I guess my point is that there was a total and utter lack of critical reporting by "influential journalists", as they were called in the MQA marketing plan, and they parroted any and all claims put forth by MQA. There is a lot of egg on a lot of faces. To your credit, I do believe you were not in that camp.

[Rt66indierock]

21 minutes ago, Digital Assassin said:

You can continue to bleed money until the cows come home if you marry an incredibly wealthy American woman whose family pumps cash into your failing business.

 

I find it ironic I'm preparing two trust returns today. But at some point you stop pumping money into it.

[Digital Assassin]

4 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

See beta House Companies. All the information you seek is public information. See the last page of the 2016 MQA  group reports and the 2015 Meridian Audio group report. 

God Bless The Queen.

[Digital Assassin]

1 minute ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

I find it ironic I'm preparing two trust returns today. But at some point you stop pumping money into it.

Indeed.

 

Meridian's products never had any commercial appeal, and still don't to this day.

[soxr]

3 hours ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Considering what can be done in software I see endless opportunities in the near future for you to review, compare and write how to articles. This is type of software is only beginning. I seem to remember writing about wanting control of the filters a while back.

The good thing about MQA is the fact that the competition also starts to think about improving or changing filter design (e.g. minimum phase vs linear phase), ways to improve compression (e.g. blank noise bits in flac so the entropy encoder has less work to do = smaller files), ways to deblur pcm while not licensing anything from Bob.

This whole MQA discussion was interesting as I learned a lot in the process. It made me test ideas that were on my todo list, but faster than what I was planning.

This drives competition which is good. I'm happy we don't need to license MQA decoders but we can process MQA in a different way and we can benefit from the lessons learned and also apply that knowledge to non-MQA files


 

[Digital Assassin]

6 minutes ago, soxr said:

The good thing about MQA is the fact that the competition also starts to think about improving or changing filter design (e.g. minimum phase vs linear phase), ways to improve compression (e.g. blank noise bits in flac so the entropy encoder has less work to do = smaller files), ways to deblur pcm while not licensing anything from Bob.

This whole MQA discussion was interesting as I learned a lot in the process. It made me test ideas that were on my todo list, but faster than what I was planning.

This drives competition which is good. I'm happy we don't need to license MQA decoders but we can process MQA in a different way and we can benefit from the lessons learned and also apply that knowledge to non-MQA files


 

I agree competition is good.

 

Perhaps, though, we can stop referring to any filtering solutions as "MQA" like, and just phase out the term as others come up with improved digital architecture. The sooner we stop using the fabricated marketing acronym, the better.

 

Just a suggestion.

[Shadders]

4 minutes ago, soxr said:

ways to deblur pcm while not licensing anything from Bob.


 

Hi,

I am not sure you can licence/patent an inverse function, or other numerical processing, which is the reverse of a system you do not own.

Will be interesting if MQA lawyers try to challenge any reverse engineering which is just number crunching to reverse an effect from the 70's, 80's, 90's or 00's recording.

Regards,

Shadders.

[Ralf11]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patent

 

then there is copyright law...

[mansr]

16 minutes ago, Digital Assassin said:

I agree competition is good.

 

Perhaps, though, we can stop referring to any filtering solutions as "MQA" like, and just phase out the term as others come up with improved digital architecture. The sooner we stop using the fabricated marketing acronym, the better.

 

Just a suggestion.

Someone suggested adopting the moniker NQA, Native Quality Audio, for things that are not MQA.

[Digital Assassin]

14 minutes ago, mansr said:

Someone suggested adopting the moniker NQA, Native Quality Audio, for things that are not MQA.

"Native Quality Audio" I like it! 

[Ralf11]

 

[Fokus]

11 hours ago, Rt66indierock said:

This is type of software is only beginning. I seem to remember writing about wanting control of the filters a while back.

 

Not too long ago you could find threads here on CA about people fussing over the parameters for iZotope sample rate conversion, with tiny fractions of changes allegedly responsible for massive changes in sound. These threads were all the more funny because many of these people did not even understand what the parameters meant, and how illegal/invalid many of the filters they generated were. But blacks were blackerder, veils were lifted and then removed totally, the musicians were here and the listeners were there, over and over again, that much closer to the true sound.

 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

4 minutes ago, Fokus said:

 

Not too long ago you could find threads here on CA about people fussing over the parameters for iZotope sample rate conversion, with tiny fractions of changes allegedly responsible for massive changes in sound. These threads were all the more funny because many of these people did not even understand what the parameters meant, and how illegal/invalid many of the filters they generated were. But blacks were blackerder, veils were lifted and then removed totally, the musicians were here and the listeners were there, over and over again, that much closer to the true sound.

 

 

What a great opportunity to help those who lacked the education to understand what they were doing. 

 

I'm guessing you offered some quick tips?

[esldude]

1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

What a great opportunity to help those who lacked the education to understand what they were doing. 

 

I'm guessing you offered some quick tips?

Would you posit a guess as to how well that would go?

[esldude]

MQA is really its evil twin AQM.  Authenticated Quality Missing.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Just now, esldude said:

Would you posit a guess as to how well that would go?

 

It would be welcomed by the 99% of reasonable people here and unwelcome by the vocal 1%. 

 

I assume an illegal or invalid filter would be cause for concern for anyone, including us knuckle dragging audiophiles :~)

[Fokus]

1 minute ago, esldude said:

Would you posit a guess as to how well that would go?

 

After two decades of attempting such education one tends to give up. At least in certain quarters.

 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

5 minutes ago, Fokus said:

 

After two decades of attempting such education one tends to give up. At least in certain quarters.

 

 

I hear ya. 

[soxr]

1 hour ago, esldude said:

MQA is really its evil twin AQM.  Authenticated Quality Missing.

 

or Missing Quality Assurance
http://www.6moons.com/industryfeatures/mqa/1.html

 

Quote

On the technical side, we requested their decoder to develop proper unit-to-unit QC protocols as we have always done on our end. They only promised a few test tones. Those are insufficient to measure distortion, bandwidth, impulse response, linearity and noise to mention just a few. They seem to be very afraid to divulge more about their algorithm to us, their intended business partners. If we can't properly test our MQA-enabled product, how can we be confident to ship it around the world?

 

[Sal1950]

3 hours ago, soxr said:

http://www.6moons.com/industryfeatures/mqa/1.html

"To rewind a tad, all business is about profit. That's the nature of the beast. Nobody goes into business to work for free or give stuff away. However, when business involves collaboration with other commercial entities, it's common sense to expect balanced contracts which are mutually beneficial to all parties concerned. "

 

Sounds like President Trump talking about our foreign trade agreements. Common sense needing to prevail for both sides.  

Two thumbs up.  

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 hours ago, Sal1950 said:

"To rewind a tad, all business is about profit. That's the nature of the beast. Nobody goes into business to work for free or give stuff away. However, when business involves collaboration with other commercial entities, it's common sense to expect balanced contracts which are mutually beneficial to all parties concerned. "

 

Sounds like President Trump talking about our foreign trade agreements. Common sense needing to prevail for both sides.  

Two thumbs up.  

 

Not defending anyone here, but this is usually accomplished through negotiations and each party weighing the pros and cons. If the contract doesn't make sense to sign, you don't sign it. I'm totally fine with any company offering whatever terms and conditions it wants in a contract, as long as I'm not required to sign it by law. Hopefully a somewhat free market will prevail and people will decide what's best for them or their companies. 

[Digital Assassin]

4 hours ago, Sal1950 said:

"To rewind a tad, all business is about profit. That's the nature of the beast. Nobody goes into business to work for free or give stuff away. However, when business involves collaboration with other commercial entities, it's common sense to expect balanced contracts which are mutually beneficial to all parties concerned. "

 

Sounds like President Trump talking about our foreign trade agreements. Common sense needing to prevail for both sides.  

Two thumbs up.  

No, sounds like fraud and collusion, Actually.

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 minutes ago, Digital Assassin said:

No, sounds like fraud and collusion, Actually.

 

Who is colluding and committing fraud with respect to MQA? if you're talking politics, I understand, but let's keep that out of the MQA discussion.