MQA is Vaporware

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 hours ago, firedog said:

A PR campaign and it's results don't have to be the result of an actual conspiracy, but the effect can be the same.

That's what seems to be going on to many of us. Many of us listen to MQA and don't hear anything revolutionary or even consistently better than standard recordings. So when we keep reading in the audiophile press about how obviously better MQA is we are left scratching our heads. We can only conclude that either deliberate deception or groupthink about MQA are owing on - and both of these things have happened in the audio world before.

Many of us can remember being told how great early digital sounded (even when it didn't) from these same types of sources.

The fact that the profit motive of several of the actors involved  and the DRM aspects of MQA are almost totally ignored by the audio press is also suspicous to many of us who feel like we are being "herded" into supporting MQA.

 

It isn't a conspiracy for the same reasons 9/11 wasn't an inside job. The players involved aren't sophisticated enough to carry it out, without the plan leaking. 

 

The forceful support of MQA could be seen as an indication of how those totally on the bandwagon view the state of the industry. They see it as being in such bad shape that any new change nudging people to purchase new items or music or encourage more commerce, is seen as good. The efficacy of the change is beside the point, even if it's bad in the long run. The same group of audiophiles will buy new MQA DACs now and buy new non-mqa DACs when it disappears. 

 

The blind support could also be many other things with more innocent explanations or ignorant explanations or whatever. 

[rickca]

6 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

The forceful support of MQA could be seen as an indication of how those totally on the bandwagon view the state of the industry. They see it as being in such bad shape that any new change nudging people to purchase new items or music or encourage more commerce, is seen as good. The efficacy of the change is beside the point, even if it's bad in the long run.

Wow that is really sad.  What happened to the spirit of innovation?  Despite guys like ML trying to characterize us as unhappy and angry, I think we are vibrant and curious and excited about discovery.  That's why we get upset with a bad attitude like this.

[witchdoctor]

15 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

It isn't a conspiracy for the same reasons 9/11 wasn't an inside job. The players involved aren't sophisticated enough to carry it out, without the plan leaking. 

 

The forceful support of MQA could be seen as an indication of how those totally on the bandwagon view the state of the industry. They see it as being in such bad shape that any new change nudging people to purchase new items or music or encourage more commerce, is seen as good. The efficacy of the change is beside the point, even if it's bad in the long run. The same group of audiophiles will buy new MQA DACs now and buy new non-mqa DACs when it disappears. 

 

The blind support could also be many other things with more innocent explanations or ignorant explanations or whatever. 

Thank you for recognizing the witchdoctor's "forceful support" of MQA, I'm glad it's appreciated. I bought a Node, and will likely buy the new iFi MQA DAC when it is released. This change is good in the long run just like the move to 4K was in video. 
THINK- in video we have gone from video tape, to DVD, to BRD, to UHD.

In audio we have gone from vinyl, to cassette, to CD, to MP3. MQA is already reversing the audio Titanic we have been on. Big ships turn slowly but at last we are going in the right direction. MQA now has more albums released than DSD and the DSD ship is going straight to the bottom of the ocean because nobody other than a very narrow market BUYS it because it is too expensive ($20+ a pop), too much of a hassle (dac required), lack of desirable content (which will get worse with the labels on the MQA train), and bulky files (good luck streaming DSD).
 

[witchdoctor]

2 minutes ago, rickca said:

Wow that is really sad.  What happened to the spirit of innovation?  Despite guys like ML trying to characterize us as unhappy and angry, I think we are vibrant and curious and excited about discovery.  That's why we get upset with a bad attitude like this.

Witchdoctor also gets upset with bad attitude from feisty members, good point.

[The Computer Audiophile]

13 minutes ago, witchdoctor said:

Thank you for recognizing the witchdoctor's "forceful support" of MQA, I'm glad it's appreciated. I bought a Node, and will likely buy the new iFi MQA DAC when it is released. This change is good in the long run just like the move to 4K was in video. 
THINK- in video we have gone from video tape, to DVD, to BRD, to UHD.

In audio we have gone from vinyl, to cassette, to CD, to MP3. MQA is already reversing the audio Titanic we have been on. Big ships turn slowly but at last we are going in the right direction. MQA now has more albums released than DSD and the DSD ship is going straight to the bottom of the ocean because nobody other than a very narrow market BUYS it because it is too expensive ($20+ a pop), too much of a hassle (dac required), lack of desirable content (which will get worse with the labels on the MQA train), and bulky files (good luck streaming DSD).
 

I don't believe 4k video was something consumers asked for or need. I'm not sure it's actually that good for anyone other than those with giant screens who sit close, and the people selling goods. 

 

Lossless 1080p, which isn't sent into homes via streaming, satellite, or cable, would be better. When people see how good an over the air HD video looks compared to lossy 4k, they may think twice about 4k. The same can be said for great 44.1 versus high resolution and MQA.

[witchdoctor]

I can't comment on 4K, I am waiting for the PJ prices to come down. That being said I just got into 3D video this year and think it is awesome. I know it has been pretty much abandoned, I certainly didn't need it but now that I tried it I prefer it. The same can be said for my experience with MQA. I certainly didn't need it but now that I tried it, I prefer it.

[crenca]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

It isn't a conspiracy for the same reasons 9/11 wasn't an inside job. The players involved aren't sophisticated enough to carry it out, without the plan leaking. 

 

The forceful support of MQA could be seen as an indication of how those totally on the bandwagon view the state of the industry. They see it as being in such bad shape that any new change nudging people to purchase new items or music or encourage more commerce, is seen as good. The efficacy of the change is beside the point, even if it's bad in the long run. The same group of audiophiles will buy new MQA DACs now and buy new non-mqa DACs when it disappears. 

 

The blind support could also be many other things with more innocent explanations or ignorant explanations or whatever. 

 

Is this belief by those on the "inside" (for lack of better term) correct?  Putting aside music sales - is the sales of "high end" (define by some ultimately arbitrary number - say total system cost of above $2k to throw something out) equipment down or up in the last 25 years?  Now that the Best Buy, home theatre revolution has done its damage, what are the sales of "high end" equipment?

 

My sense is that there are plenty of new manufacturers and players entering market (a kind of "churn") and that prices have and continue to rise at "luxury" rates of increase (i.e. far exceeding inflation) so I don't get the sense that despite some usual market variability (always a factor) that there is a trend of immanent demise.  This is just my sense - what is the truth here?

 

Now, when it comes to the trade publications I can see where they are definitely driven by fads and the new for exposure and commerce, but surely they are not so anti-consumer as to completely ignore the impact of MQA from other angles than SQ and sales...oh wait, yes they are. 

[crenca]

1 hour ago, rickca said:

Wow that is really sad.  What happened to the spirit of innovation?  Despite guys like ML trying to characterize us as unhappy and angry, I think we are vibrant and curious and excited about discovery.  That's why we get upset with a bad attitude like this.

 

Well stated.  

[crenca]

49 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I don't believe 4k video was something consumers asked for or need. I'm not sure it's actually that good for anyone other than those with giant screens who sit close, and the people selling goods. 

 

Lossless 1080p, which isn't sent into homes via streaming, satellite, or cable, would be better. When people see how good an over the air HD video looks compared to lossy 4k, they may think twice about 4k. The same can be said for great 44.1 versus high resolution and MQA.

 

Your on a roll Chris!  I am not into video but I have wondered this exact same thing.  Is 4k going to be a kind of "consumer wake up call" for video as MQA has been in audio?  

 

[rickca]

57 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Lossless 1080p, which isn't sent into homes via streaming, satellite, or cable, would be better.

Exactly.  I doubt Netflix ultra HD is even close to Blu-Ray.  Best Buy sells tons of 4K TV sets despite the lack of content.  

[fung0]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I don't believe 4k video was something consumers asked for or need. I'm not sure it's actually that good for anyone other than those with giant screens who sit close, and the people selling goods. 

 

Lossless 1080p, which isn't sent into homes via streaming, satellite, or cable, would be better. When people see how good an over the air HD video looks compared to lossy 4k, they may think twice about 4k. The same can be said for great 44.1 versus high resolution and MQA.

 

You make two excellent points, one regarding 4K video and a wider one regarding media formats in general.

 

It's pretty obvious that 4K (a.k.a. UHD) exists purely because a) the video industry needs something new to sell, and b) because higher-resolution LCD panels just keep rolling off the production lines at lower and lower cost. Neither of these reasons has anything to do with 4K being better for the consumer. Nor is much said about the obvious trade-off you bring up: 4K with greater compression vs HD with less compression. I've got 9GB DVDs today that look better than most Blu-ray transfers, and I've seen plenty of HD that wastes its spatial resolution by introducing horrible temporal artifacts.

 

It's been suggested that audio is 'evolving naturally' through a succession of formats: LP, Redbook CD, MP3, DXD, 24/192 FLAC and now, at last, MQA... or something like that. This is at best a disastrous over-simplification. Many of the steps in this evolution have involved significant trade-offs. MP3, for example, sacrificed quality compared to CD, but enabled digital distribution at a time when bandwidth and storage were not adequate to handle early lossless formats like SHN and APE. Today, there's little reason for MP3 to exist, other than momentum, but we're is stuck with it.

 

MQA similarly is not a clear step forward - and its compromises are not nearly as well attuned to our current technical situation as those of MP3 were in its early days. MQA is a lossy format, at a time when we no longer need to accept lossy encoding. It offers smaller data sizes than 'high-res' FLAC (yet bigger than CD-quality FLAC), at a time when bandwidth and storage are no longer constrained. And it's DRM-encumbered ('authentication' is by definition a form of 'digital rights management') at a time when we've largely shed the useless baggage of DRM.

 

Meanwhile, the preponderance of evidence tells us that MQA is not audibly superior to 24/192 PCM/FLAC. Fans do claim otherwise, but are unable to provide either empirical evidence or theoretical corroboration of their subjective opinions. MQA Ltd. itself has conspicuously failed to provide (or even enable) extensive, well-constructed, third-party, blind testing, suggesting a certain lack of faith in its own technology. And it has attempted to keep theoretical details under wraps, even though they're heavily protected by patents. (The intended purpose of patents is the sharing of technological innovations, not their obfuscation.)

 

At least 4K 'does no harm,' in that it's effectively a complete superset of HD. It may bring some inferior mastering in the short term, but in the long run there's no reason not to adopt it - just as there's no conceivable harm in extending the PCM standard to include 24/192 in addition to 16/44. The extra storage and bandwidth required in either transition is barely important today, and will be completely insignificant going forward.

 

Not so with MQA. This is more like moving from 16/44 FLAC/PC to some kind of ultra-high-bitrate 24/192 MP3. Some might say they "prefer the warm sound, the involving soundstage, the subtle presence" of 24/192 MP3 - but that's not nearly enough to justify the establishment of a whole new audio distribution format. Or, at least, it shouldn't be.

[MetalNuts]

42 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I don't believe 4k video was something consumers asked for or need. I'm not sure it's actually that good for anyone other than those with giant screens who sit close, and the people selling goods. 

 

Lossless 1080p, which isn't sent into homes via streaming, satellite, or cable, would be better. When people see how good an over the air HD video looks compared to lossy 4k, they may think twice about 4k. The same can be said for great 44.1 versus high resolution and MQA.

 

Despite it is not the right place to talk about 4K video, with respect I myself as one of the consumers  prefers 4K which is so much better.  The break through is like from VCD to DVD.  Once you have watched 4K, it is hard to go back.  The technology in 4K and HDR is not adding a who knows what filters as in MQA.  

 

Having said that, I do agree that  a bigger TV is needed to get the most benefit of 4K video.  However, is MQA so magical that it can be proved that it sounds better in a crap equipment?  If they can really do that, I wonder how the HIFI equipment industry will survive since it is no longer the equipment that makes it sound better but MQA.

[DarwinOSX]

HDR is much more of a benefit than 4K. 4k is pretty benign since it’s on most TVs and there are a wide variety of prices. By the way I sit close enough to see the benefit of 4K but HDR is mout of the ballpark nice.

I’m also loving MQA on Tidal. 

[witchdoctor]

52 minutes ago, MetalNuts said:

 

Despite it is not the right place to talk about 4K video, with respect I myself as one of the consumers  prefers 4K which is so much better.  The break through is like from VCD to DVD.  Once you have watched 4K, it is hard to go back.  The technology in 4K and HDR is not adding a who knows what filters as in MQA.  

 

Having said that, I do agree that  a bigger TV is needed to get the most benefit of 4K video.  However, is MQA so magical that it can be proved that it sounds better in a crap equipment?  If they can really do that, I wonder how the HIFI equipment industry will survive since it is no longer the equipment that makes it sound better but MQA.

That is exactly why I like MQA, once I listened to it I can't go back. MQA will have to sound better on crap equipment or the masses that use crappy equipment won't pay the premium. That doesn't mean it will sound great, just better than low rez on crappy equipment. 

[witchdoctor]

1 minute ago, DarwinOSX said:

HDR is much more of a benefit than 4K. 4k is pretty benign since it’s on most TVs and there are a wide variety of prices. By the way I sit close enough to see the benefit of 4K but HDR is mout of the ballpark nice.

I’m also loving MQA on Tidal. 

+1, finally someone with good taste on this thread

[DarwinOSX]

I’m using a Meridian Explorer 2.   Would like to have more options and first decode in software on iOS devices. 

[firedog]

4 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I don't believe 4k video was something consumers asked for or need. I'm not sure it's actually that good for anyone other than those with giant screens who sit close, and the people selling goods. 

 

Lossless 1080p, which isn't sent into homes via streaming, satellite, or cable, would be better. When people see how good an over the air HD video looks compared to lossy 4k, they may think twice about 4k. The same can be said for great 44.1 versus high resolution and MQA.

The video comparison witchdoctor makes is a bad analogy for one simple reason: most people see the benefits of hi-res video and screens immediately, (not necessarily 4k) but most don't hear the advantage of hi-res audio because it is subtle - and on highly volume compressed music (most today) and hip hop type music, it doesn't really make a positive difference.

 

The better my system has gotten, the more I've realized that well recorded Redbook sounds fine, and I'm happy with it. Some Redbook recordings sound better than a lot of hi-res ones. I'd still prefer a well done hi-res recording, but it isn't an absolute necessity for me to feel I'm listening to something very good. 

[PeterSt]

9 hours ago, firedog said:

Many of us listen to MQA and don't hear anything revolutionary or even consistently better than standard recordings. So when we keep reading in the audiophile press about how obviously better MQA is we are left scratching our heads.

 

What if this is related to experience ?

I Read your post, firedog, and suddenly it came to me that there is a common denominator between this what you call press (but which is often reviewers and mastering engineers) and me : day in day out listening very explicitly for improvement. In my case of my own gear, but there is not much difference with "different gear" if you see what we achieve with software upgrades, hardware upgrades and USB cables for that matter. I am sure I would be as  enthusiastic as the press you refer to, just because it is the most easy (for me, by now) to find these great MQA albums. The point is that it seems to be so that this does not count for each and everything, plus I hear a flavor in the sound (which in this case is not killing).

 

In the context of the Boris Blank album PeterV made the remark similar to "great that MQA even works for electronic music". WRONG ! it is MADE for that. I already noticed with Yello - Toy (which is 48KHz IIRC) that it sounds way better (or more emphasizing the goodness of MQA) than other albums. This Boris Blank no different. And at least that one I never heard of before, so I can ben quite objective.

 

All it would need is that MQA showcases pick the albums which work best for MQA and show that to the press et all.

So what I am saying is that it would be very easy to let sound MQA way better than normal Redbook and certainly (all this failed) Hires.

And mind you, I am working on this since April or so. And contrary to most of us here, I want it to work.

[PeterV]

I wonder what is your opinion Chris Conaker and all other readers regarding the latest post of Frederic vanden Poel who does not understand what privacy really means. Sending an e-mail to my employer in a pathetic attempt to smuther my opinion regarding this new format. Then the witchhunt began, incriminating me that I am being paid by MQA. Total paranoia acting by him, checking my Facebook account where I work..and if something has been changed on FB,  he accuses me for being shill and paid by MQA.. ! So that is the reason why I am now fighting back and acuse him to be a fraud who is convinced that all music must be played at 432 Hz. This occult conviction is the real reason why his hate towards MQA is over the top and his motivation to use every means to 'kill' it. All my posts on CA and Archimago and others over the last 2 years by ne are of private nature and not related to my employer or any other imaginary employer which would be MQA in the mind of this sick conspiracy theory follower who believes all music is being recorded distorted anyway at the wrong frequency.  This has to be stopped and I request you Chris to ban us both now. Have fun everyone with this stupid format war. I am done, will just proceed loving my hobby listening to music in either PCM or PCM+ as I would define MQA. 

 

Frederic: be happy with your hobbies and convictions. I warned you not to interfere and that we would not fight and reply to each others posts. You could not resist, but now you have severly crossed a line. 

[PeterSt]

6 hours ago, #Yoda# said:

11 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

Hey Peter. I am on my knees to thank you for this indirect hint. I thought I had everything from Yello.

When I read this post two days ago I had without much thinking Boris vd Lek in mind and noted the album for giving it a try. So 10 minutes ago I gave it a go and thought ... what ?!? Yello ? I checked and indeed.

I never knew the man also made albums on individual title ! Poor me.

 

Anyway, sounding great. And obviously I don't even know the normal Redbook version.

Thanks man.

 

PS: Cut the crap now. 

Read more  

 

You should know that this is originally a 24/44.1 recording and Qobuz.com is still selling an upsampled version. Via a really good DAC with own adjusted digital filters better sounding than the MQA version on a MYTEK Brooklyn anyway.

 

This one (the album, not the single track which is also out there in MQA) is a bit special, to the regard that it is presented as 88.2 but this is only its container. It is just 44.1 with no music content at all above 22.05.

I actually was disappointed that the single track one ("Electrified") was only this single track because that one is in a 44.1 container. And, because Yello - Toy also sounds so amazing and which is 48 (in 48 container) I hoped to find similarity.

Well #Yoda#, you just gave me that clue (I thought the Boris Blank was 88.2 because from the outside it looks like that).

 

Btw, do notice that when I myself would refer to "electronic", it is not about electronic as such at all. However, it *is* about the super sharp transients that this music can exhibit and where Yello was one of the first who applied that in music (which we still tend to call "music"). Today there are many others superseding that, but my point is : when MQA is applied as advertised, then this would all over improve these transients.

And it does.

 

Let's keep in mind that I am not applying any fraudulent minimum Phase filters etc (that one is for Frederic - send your complaints to my boss) and that I also don't apply any of MQA's filters. I apply my own and the fit should theoretically be great. MQA ltd knows my objectives here ... (FWIW telling this en public).

[PeterSt]

5 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I don't believe 4k video was something consumers asked for or need. I'm not sure it's actually that good for anyone other than those with giant screens who sit close, and the people selling goods. 

 

Lossless 1080p, which isn't sent into homes via streaming, satellite, or cable, would be better. When people see how good an over the air HD video looks compared to lossy 4k, they may think twice about 4k. The same can be said for great 44.1 versus high resolution and MQA.

 

Respectfully I disagree. You should see the video we made by our drone carrying a 4K camera, that played on the relatively small 4K TV of 40" only. And it is not even OLED (man, I wished that could exist in the small size).

 

Quote

The same can be said for great 44.1 versus high resolution and MQA.

 

No wait, I agree with that one. 

 

Please carry on.

[PeterSt]

4 hours ago, rickca said:

5 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Lossless 1080p, which isn't sent into homes via streaming, satellite, or cable, would be better.

Exactly.  I doubt Netflix ultra HD is even close to Blu-Ray.  Best Buy sells tons of 4K TV sets despite the lack of content.  

 

Back on topic (ahum) : Don't underestimate how a 4K TV and decent sat receiver can either (I mean both) upscale to 4K and how that brings a vast improvement.

Or have we forgotten the 480 age which really required the (Faroudja etc. to 720 or 1080) upscaling to show on the large screen with beamer ? That really helped you know (we'd wish audio worked out the same). And it still helps today.

[The Computer Audiophile]

30 minutes ago, PeterV said:

I wonder what is your opinion Chris Conaker and all other readers regarding the latest post of Frederic vanden Poel who does not understand what privacy really means. Sending an e-mail to my employer in a pathetic attempt to smuther my opinion regarding this new format. Then the witchhunt began, incriminating me that I am being paid by MQA. Total paranoia acting by him, checking my Facebook account where I work..and if something has been changed on FB,  he accuses me for being shill and paid by MQA.. ! So that is the reason why I am now fighting back and acuse him to be a fraud who is convinced that all music must be played at 432 Hz. This occult conviction is the real reason why his hate towards MQA is over the top and his motivation to use every means to 'kill' it. All my posts on CA and Archimago and others over the last 2 years by ne are of private nature and not related to my employer or any other imaginary employer which would be MQA in the mind of this sick conspiracy theory follower who believes all music is being recorded distorted anyway at the wrong frequency.  This has to be stopped and I request you Chris to ban us both now. Have fun everyone with this stupid format war. I am done, will just proceed loving my hobby listening to music in either PCM or PCM+ as I would define MQA. 

 

Frederic: be happy with your hobbies and convictions. I warned you not to interfere and that we would not fight and reply to each others posts. You could not resist, but now you have severly crossed a line. 

Goodbye Peter. 

[PeterSt]

4 hours ago, fung0 said:

Some might say they "prefer the warm sound

 

There is no warmer sound in MQA. The contrary.

[copy_of_a]

38 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

This one (the album, not the single track which is also out there in MQA) is a bit special, to the regard that it is presented as 88.2 but this is only its container. It is just 44.1 with no music content at all above 22.05.

I actually was disappointed that the single track one ("Electrified") was only this single track because that one is in a 44.1 container. And, because Yello - Toy also sounds so amazing and which is 48 (in 48 container) I hoped to find similarity.

Well #Yoda#, you just gave me that clue (I thought the Boris Blank was 88.2 because from the outside it looks like that).

FWIW... the actual 44.1kHz/24bit version is also available:

https://www.highresaudio.com/en/album/view/e8pwcd/boris-blank-electrified