MQA is Vaporware

[botrytis]

25 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

From the man:

 

 

Perhaps driving Lyft is the 21st Century version of working at the Patent Office in Bern.

 

You must tell me your favorite coffee and coffee brewing method. I think I have almost every coffee maker known :D

[botrytis]

I have a vacuum pot, auto drip, an original 1930's stove top expresso maker, a press pot, and a few others.

 

My favorite coffee is from San Juan coffee roasters in Washington State - New Guinea “Arona” in our auto drip easy peasy and tasty :D

[botrytis]

Just now, kumakuma said:

 

MQA is the coffee equivalent of decaf...

 

No MQA is chicory coffee :D Not even real coffee.

[botrytis]

Just now, MarkusBarkus said:

...more like the beans the civets crap out.

 

Well, the cost is the same..... and the idea behind how it is made is also....

 

[botrytis]

I was on HiFiplus website this morning and now cannot get to their website. Anyone else having issues?

 

I am wondering if MQA had something to do with it...

[botrytis]

This is what I get from going to hifiiplus .

[botrytis]

Exactly, that is my point. Their whole website is down.

 

Now I am not a Conspiracy theorist but it seems to me, the discussion on that site about HDTracks not carrying MQA anymore might have hit them hard.

[botrytis]

1 minute ago, DuckToller said:

 

Exactly. I was able to see it this morning and then whammo, it was gone.

[botrytis]

The site is back up now.

[botrytis]

1 hour ago, fas42 said:

Maybe this is why Meridian 'invented' MQA ... a clip of their top speaker in action.

 

 

😉

 

More than likely, they lost the DSD/DVD-A battle so they want their slice of the pie.

[botrytis]

On Reddit/Audiophile

Well it has been said...

[botrytis]

A reponse to the above post in Reddit was - "I didn't realize the Tidal supports 'Cancel Culture'"

[botrytis]

I saw this on Reddit too - :D

 

[botrytis]

A gent from Reddit trying to get into the private FB MQA group. Think he will get in? 🤣

 

[botrytis]

Well, MQA is stretching the truth - the FLAC packaging is lossless, but the information in the FLAC package is not. That is basically what they said. That the FLAC package is lossless.

 

What about the heap of crap inside the package? A whole 'nother animal.

[botrytis]

I saw this on Reddit and modified it to fit the facts....

[botrytis]

2 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

He has to. He told me, “We’ve spent millions of dollars on this.” As if I should just go with it because his investors have lost a lot of money so far. 

 

This is all I can think of...

 

[botrytis]

And just remember :D

 

 

ha - a chemist joke.

[botrytis]

[botrytis]

Maybe they didn't want to work with BS directly......

 

Take the above anyway you wish  🤣

[botrytis]

4 hours ago, LarryMagoo said:

With all this nonsense/fraud about MQA, how can anyone feel good about buying ANY PS Audio gear?

 

Qobuz is only $120/year...seems reasonable for what you get and can sample anything you can find before deciding to actually purchase a copy...

 

Sorry, but once MQA gets a foothold in, they will try to shove in the whole body. But, you are paying extra for having MQA delivered to you and it is not good. 128K MP3's sound better.

[botrytis]

I hope Mr. Atkinson sees that MQA really does not deliver what it says it does. In science, a theory is held as right, until evidence to the contrary is shown. There has certainly many examples of negative evidence that what MQA is selling is not what they are describing. Scientist do change their opinions based on the latest and greatest data out there. I have done it many times in my career.

 

Just remember, "To Err is Human, to Forgive is Divine'.

 

I also think that the audiophile world would react positive to a relook at it by Stereophile and to look that the non-data as shown by MQA versus the ACTUAL MEASURED DATA by Archimago, et al.

 

I guess hope springs eternal, for me, in the hope that MQA will just fade away.

[botrytis]

24 minutes ago, GregWormald said:

May I suggest that to be taken seriously we need to avoid the same denigrative tactics and exaggeration (lies?) that MQA has used. They are already having to back down from some of their more suspect claims due to the diligence of some "auditors". If that can be kept up they may well have to back down to just being a lossy compression algorithm that may sound better than MP3 .

 

Remember that while "fighting fire with fire" can be tempting, the real professionals mostly use water.

 

Actually, MQA didn't they just refocused by saying that the FLAC container is lossless, so the data contained must be lossless - NOT!

[botrytis]

As long as it isn't Engineered for Apple Music. Not crazy about that either.

[botrytis]

14 minutes ago, StephenJK said:

Chris,

 

I hadn't bothered watching that RMAF presentation from start to finish until this morning.  

 

As a Toastmaster with a DTM I’ve done many speeches and presentations, either informally or professionally and like to think I have some small skills in that area.    

 

If I was to evaluate your presentation, I would say that your one big mistake was with engaging your audience in conversation and becoming distracted from your goal – to give an effective presentation.

 

A number of your audience members obviously have a separate agenda, which was to refute your talk point by point – you should not have allowed them to do that.

 

With any presentation, the first statement is “Please hold all questions to the end.”

 

I’ve seen people try to do a more interactive back and forth approach in the belief that this could add value so that points are addressed as they’re raised.  The danger, of course is that it could turn into a sandbagging exercise, much like you were submitted to by a few audience members.  

 

At best, the presentation becomes ineffective as time is lost responding to questions or comments that may or may not be relevant.  At worse, it becomes unfocused as other audience members lose interest. 

 

The audience is there to hear what you have to say – not to challenge or refute it.  Much like any other article or topic, people are free to rebut comments or statements in their own time and with the forum of their choice.

 

I admire your ability to power through despite all the distractions, but wouldn’t have allowed a presentation to turn into a conversation – once you lose control it’s difficult to get it back. 

 

I do think the answer to your own question of “Do we need a lossy commercial algorithm” shouldn’t have been “I don’t know”, but rather “Not now, and maybe not ever.” 

 

Are you planning a follow up to this?  Or does this thread do that for you?

 

Problem is, I think Chris was hoping to have a conversation on the topic, to allow MQA to explain WHY the conclusion he came up with is wrong. But, they didn't do that.

 

I have have been trained in presentation giving, being that I am a scientist, and it is really on the audience to respect the presenter. The audience didn't. As I said, previously in this thread, I would have thrown their asses out. I have done that at presentations.

 

I give Chris credit for what he tried to do.

 

Remember here, hindsight is 20/20 and now we are giving advice on something that was already done. Nothing good ever comes of that, really.