MQA is Vaporware

[Samuel T Cogley]

Here's "crenca": "...where they had some radiologist claiming..."

 

Here are the credentials of the person in question: Daniel P. Melby, MD, Cardiac Electrophysiology, Medical Director, Electrophysiology Lab, Minneapolis Heart Institute

 

This is your smoking gun? The dude's not a radiologist?

[Samuel T Cogley]

Here's another helpful tip for you - if you continue to act like an ass, I will most certainly ignore you. Capiche? You see, I don't mind having a conversation but I do mind bullshit.

 

I see how you run your comments section. This is not that.

[plissken]

I wasn't really sure where to post this since there are so many MQA threads so I decided to post it here.

 

The most disappointing thing from my perspective regarding MQA is the apparent requirement of MQA hardware to obtain its full sonic benefits.

 

MQA is a software stack. Specific hardware to play it back is just an expensive dongle. We had those in the 90's for running QuarkExpress. You had to have the dongle plugged into the computer or QE wouldn't work.

[Michael Lavorgna]

This is your smoking gun? The dude's not a radiologist?

 

That is a misrepresentation. Look it up, chief.

[Samuel T Cogley]

That is a misrepresentation. Look it up, chief.

 

Ok, go on. This is a "ban worthy" offense?

[Michael Lavorgna]

I see how you run your comments section. This is not that.

Here's a question for you - how many people have I banned from AudioStream?

[Samuel T Cogley]

Here's a question for you - how many people have I banned from AudioStream?

 

Ahhh, I never said "banned" in this context. What's the print version of a Freudian Slip?

[Michael Lavorgna]

Ahhh, I never said "banned" in this context. What's the print version of a Freudian Slip?

Bzzzz. Wrong answer. It's been nice playing "Pointless Posturing" with you.

[Samuel T Cogley]

Bzzzz. Wrong answer. It's been nice playing "Pointless Posturing" with you.

 

And your appearance of being reasonable still doesn't get us any closer to you rebutting that MQA post you deleted, right?

[Michael Lavorgna]

And your appearance of being reasonable still doesn't get us any closer to you rebutting that MQA post you deleted, right?

 

I've already explained my reasoning in another response here. If you have a relevant question about that response, ask it. If you think I'm going to play defense to your offensiveness, think again.

[mansr]

Here's another helpful tip for you - if you continue to act like an ass, I will most certainly ignore you. Capiche? You see, I don't mind having a conversation but I do mind bullshit.

 

I see only one ass around here, and it's you. Please go away if you're not willing to contribute in a civil tone.

[Samuel T Cogley]

I've already explained my reasoning in another response here. If you have a relevant question about that response, ask it. If you think I'm going to play defense to your offensiveness, think again.

 

I stand by my original prediction of a lack of any substantive back and forth. And the fragile ego observation as well.

 

I get it. You're just trying to make a living, right?

[plissken]

This post of yours, "crenca", is a perfect example of your "style" - purposeful misrepresentation, misinformation, and simply being flat out wrong.

 

I find that hilariously ironic coming from you. You are known to ban users and delete posts where you are getting a technical beat down that look bad for your advertisers.

 

Your infamous BS Audiophile Ethernet review comes to mind.

 

You are everything that is wrong with the industry.

[Michael Lavorgna]

I stand by my original prediction of a lack of any substantive back and forth. And the fragile ego observation as well.

 

I get it. You're just trying to make a living, right?

 

 

Just as I thought, Nothing of substance.

[Michael Lavorgna]

I find that hilariously ironic coming from you. You are known to ban users and delete posts where you are getting a technical beat down that look bad for your advertisers.

 

Your infamous BS Audiophile Ethernet review comes to mind.

 

You are everything that is wrong with the industry.

 

Thank you.

[Samuel T Cogley]

Just as I thought, Nothing of substance.

 

You have a reputation. Why is a discussion of that "Nothing of substance"?

[Michael Lavorgna]

You have a reputation. Why is a discussion of that "Nothing of substance"?

 

 

Because I'm not in high school.

[Samuel T Cogley]

You have a reputation. Why is a discussion of that "Nothing of substance"?

 

Because I'm not in high school.

 

That usually works in your comments section. I see it often. I look forward to your rebuttal of the valid MQA critique that you censored.

[plissken]

Here's a novel idea - try asking a meaningful question.

 

In what way where you able to establish that Ethernet cables had a 'plainly apparent and easy to hear' difference?

 

What is your theory behind the perceived improvements?

 

Because in the Aug 2012 posting on Forest and Cinnamon Ethernet cables you weren't so sure as you were in the September 2013 posting.

[Michael Lavorgna]

That usually works in your comments section. I see it often. I look forward to your rebuttal of the valid MQA critique that you censored.

 

My "rebuttal" is already here.

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/mqa-vaporware-31115/index15.html#post623618

[mansr]

My "rebuttal" is already here.

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/mqa-vaporware-31115/index15.html#post623618

 

That's not a rebuttal, that's "shooting the messenger."

[Michael Lavorgna]

In what way where you able to establish that Ethernet cables and a 'plainly apparent and easy to hear'?

 

What is your theory behind the perceived improvements?

The Ethernet reviews were published in 2013. Since that time I've written a number of additional articles on Ethernet that get into detail about this subject. I'd suggest reading what I've written.

[plissken]

My "rebuttal" is already here.

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/mqa-vaporware-31115/index15.html#post623618

 

Here is a snippet of the Linn posting at their forum. Please counterpoint away:

 

"A supply chain monopoly

 

MQA is an attempt to not simply sell the same content again at a higher margin, or to maintain audio quality in streaming ecosystems: it is an outright land grab. It’s an attempt to control and extract revenue from every part of the supply chain, and not just over content that they hold the rights for. It really is quite extraordinary. Let’s break it down:

 

Manufacturers of recording equipment will have to license the technology and adapt their products. MQA gets paid.

 

Developers of recording software systems will require certified software plug-ins. MQA gets paid

 

Recording and Mastering engineers must purchase and use certified equipment and software. MQA gets paid.

 

Artists must use studios and engineers utilising certified equipment and new workflows; or even pay to have their back catalogue ‘remastered’ in MQA. The costs of this, of course, are borne by the artist, either directly, or recouped from royalties.

 

Digital distributors will have to license MQA and purchase/lease a ‘Hyper-Security Module’ to encrypt/encode/watermark files ready for delivery to download services. MQA gets paid.

 

Download and Streaming service providers will have to agree to commercial terms and become partners from which MQA gets paid.

 

Physical media manufacturers can use MQA to author on to CD and DVD, presumably there will be licensing agreement required for this too. MQA gets paid.

 

Hi-fi manufacturers—software developers of players—will have to adapt their products and license the technology. MQA gets paid.

 

End customers, having paid a premium for MQA music via licensed content providers, will also have to buy MQA certified players at increased cost, with a license paid for each unit shipped. MQA gets paid."

[plissken]

The Ethernet reviews were published in 2013. Since that time I've written a number of additional articles on Ethernet that get into detail about this subject. I'd suggest reading what I've written.

 

Can you provide some links please? Do you have anything about what you think is happening and can you bridge conjecture and assumption to actual measurements?

 

I know Archimago tested some Ethernet cables and couldn't find any differences. But then again you banned him too.

[Michael Lavorgna]

Can you provide some links please?

 

I do not have time as I have an appointment to get to. I'd recommend searching for "Ethernet" on AudioStream.

 

One thing to note -- "cables" do not have a "sound". Systems do.