MQA is Vaporware

[synn]

1 hour ago, crenca said:

 

That is their reputation, as it appears to be a trait no matter the implementation.  Is it a higher end tilt?

 

No doubt someone will post the exception however

 

I see, thank you.

 

i am not sure if I like this sound signature very much. I have owned several devices with Wolfson chips and they sounded warm and inviting. My current DAC has Analog Devices chips and it sounds wonderful as well. 

 

I will play around with the filters a bit to see if things sound any different.

[synn]

17 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

 

Thanks for this.  Your experience with MQA on a DP-S1 mirrors mine on a DP-X1.  I liked vanilla PCM better.

 

Youre welcome!

 

There definitely is a difference between folded and unfolded MQA, but so far, PCM is winning.

 

i will do the blind tests later today.

[synn]

Blind test completed.

I added all three tracks into a folder, set it to play in random and put the player in my pocket for a good hour or so. I lost track of the number of times I heard the song play, but it was a LOT. Now and then, I took the player out of the pocket and checked the screen to see if I got the format correct.

 

I picked the MQA file correctly every single time. Towards the end of the test I didn't even need to take the player out, I just knew when the MQA file was on.

 

 

The file overall sounds very brittle compared to the PCM and DSD versions. The highs have a certain "Cheesegrater" quality to it, which is quite evident in my test track with some prominent percussion and wind instrumentation. The PCM and especially, DSD files feel much more mellow in comparison. I felt that the MQA sounded a bit more compressed as well, but I can't say this with certain authority. No no no, do not want.

 

So overall, I have decided to give MQA a miss. No thank you. If I wanted grating highs, I'd buy an old Philips CD player and some Grados.

I should also add that I found the DSD file very pleasant. I should be spending a bit more time with the DSD format and give it a fair shake, which I haven't really done till now.

 

[firedog]

10 hours ago, synn said:

but this is the second device with ESS Saber chips that I have found to sound rather clinical

No, it depends on the implementation. There are ESS based devices that don't sound that way at all.

[asdf1000]

Just now, firedog said:

No, it depends on the implementation. There are ESS based devices that don't sound that way at all.

 

Absolutely. The PS Audio NuWave DSD DAC doesn't sound clinical at all... Ayre DACs too...

 

[PeterSt]

10 hours ago, Rt66indierock said:

Peter St maker of XXHigh End wrote about his filters

 

FYI and FWIW : JA en me know each other in person.

 

10 hours ago, Rt66indierock said:

Charley Hansen’s alternative

 

It would be great if someone officially continued Charley's work of the last weeks of his life. Stephen, I must assume that you can guess what I am talking about.

[Rt66indierock]

9 hours ago, synn said:

Blind test completed.

I added all three tracks into a folder, set it to play in random and put the player in my pocket for a good hour or so. I lost track of the number of times I heard the song play, but it was a LOT. Now and then, I took the player out of the pocket and checked the screen to see if I got the format correct.

 

I picked the MQA file correctly every single time. Towards the end of the test I didn't even need to take the player out, I just knew when the MQA file was on.

 

 

The file overall sounds very brittle compared to the PCM and DSD versions. The highs have a certain "Cheesegrater" quality to it, which is quite evident in my test track with some prominent percussion and wind instrumentation. The PCM and especially, DSD files feel much more mellow in comparison. I felt that the MQA sounded a bit more compressed as well, but I can't say this with certain authority. No no no, do not want.

 

So overall, I have decided to give MQA a miss. No thank you. If I wanted grating highs, I'd buy an old Philips CD player and some Grados.

I should also add that I found the DSD file very pleasant. I should be spending a bit more time with the DSD format and give it a fair shake, which I haven't really done till now.

 

 

As far as DSD go for it but remember people like Cookie Marenco can make great DSD recordings with simple tools, I can make very good ones (so I'm told) but files have to be converted to PCM to do any real editing. The difficulty in editing limits its usefulness.

[Rt66indierock]

5 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

FYI and FWIW : JA en me know each other in person.

 

 

It would be great if someone officially continued Charley's work of the last weeks of his life. Stephen, I must assume that you can guess what I am talking about.

 

I was making a time reference to a post of yours about 16/44.1 and filters. And if John Atkinson knows you he has less of an excuse to be a supporter of MQA. 

[Samuel T Cogley]

Has anyone had any experience with MQA decoding of UMG audibly watermarked material from Tidal?  Is there any MQA encoded UMG media yet?

 

EDIT: This could be one.

[Mshenay]

9 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

Has anyone had any experience with MQA decoding of UMG audibly watermarked material from Tidal?  Is there any MQA encoded UMG media yet?

 

EDIT: This could be one.

 

I'm in this boat as well has any one experienced it? All the buzz around the new Pro-Ject Pre S2 and it's dual ESS Sabre hardware pair'd with MQA Ready out of the box has me interested. I'm in the market for a new DAC and I'm wondering if MQA should be on my list of boxs to check... but I run into this kind of information?! Audible Watermarks on digitally sourced files sounds disgusting, is this just added to streaming and downloads or are CDs also in this group, I'd imagine a Hard Disc is not but still... my interest in MQA has waned after reading about practices like this... I skipped DSD and I'm very much on the fence about MQA...

[PeterSt]

11 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

EDIT: This could be one.

 

But that leads to nowhere (over here).  

 

1 hour ago, Mshenay said:

is this just added to streaming

 

Tidal and Watermarking (and MQA) ?

[Mshenay]

Good link thank you! Honestly I already pay for Spotify, I may just skip on MQA for now and wait for them to pick up a Lossless streaming option 

[Rt66indierock]

On 12/11/2017 at 8:52 PM, Mshenay said:

Good link thank you! Honestly I already pay for Spotify, I may just skip on MQA for now and wait for them to pick up a Lossless streaming option 

 

I wouldn't hold your breath about lossless streaming. People are now reporting TIDAL is running out of cash. There may not be a market for lossless streaming if the price is above $9.99 a month.

[FredericV]

Just listened to Björk Utopia on Tidal. First track was horrible.

TIDAL > Featured > Recommended > Albums > Utopia by Björk

To my surprise, just not 1 mbit was going over the network and I see in the debug log the flac samplerate is 44100, so I assume at this bitrate it must be 24/44.1 MQA.

To my surprise, Technics also offers this track but in 24/96:

https://tracks.technics.com/GB/artists/23127?p=12%2C16%2C17#filters

 

So another example of different masters being used?

Is Tidal now pushing MQA on most new releases (or vice versa)?

 

 

[Rt66indierock]

I want touch on the “I’m neutral,”  “I’m still studying MQA” responses of some of the audio press. Looking at the case of Lee Scroggins of The Part Time Audiophile is particularly illuminating.

 

I’ve had private email conversations with the now banned Peter Veth and it is my opinion you couldn’t become a member of his closed Facebook if you didn’t convince him you were pro MQA much less be listed as an administrator. So any comments of “I’m still studying MQA” are suspicious because it the same thing Peter was posting on John Darko’s site for about a year and a half. There were apparently discussions about how to discredit Brain Lucey and sure enough Lee manages to get a thread Brian was participating in taken down on Steve Hoffman Music Forums. Then Brain comes back to Computer Audiophile and Lee twists the conversation toward compression that sure appeared to be deliberate and calculated to antagonize many  members of the CA community. Understandably Brian has a short fuse about MQA since he posted his first objection to MQA in Stereophile December 2014 and real organized opposition didn’t start until two years later. So he pushed back on people and got himself banned here.

 

Lee also said he is getting an interview with an MQA representative something you can’t get unless you are a known supporter of MQA.  After all MQA Ltd announced after RMAF  they will not answer critics of MQA. He did his hit and run and vanished.

 

Actions speak louder than any words and Lee is pro MQA.  If you have press credentials in audio you are not neutral you are pro MQA with a handful of exceptions.

 

I don’t know how the press decided to support MQA but my research indicates that at least for the last seventeen years the same people have been pushing the same agenda and they are in a panic because if MQA is not successful there is no new format on the horizon to promote.

[beetlemania]

31 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 So he pushed back on people and got himself banned here.
 

 

Brian Lucey is banned here?

smh

[Rt66indierock]

3 minutes ago, beetlemania said:

 

Brian Lucey is banned here?

smh

 

I think we were burning Jim Austin at the stake on Audio Asylum at the time.

[esldude]

25 minutes ago, beetlemania said:

 

Brian Lucey is banned here?

smh

Rightfully so if you ask me.   Nothing directly related to MQA.  He is anti-MQA, I am anti-MQA.  He just didn't play nice with others in the kindergarten sense.  

[mansr]

47 minutes ago, esldude said:

Rightfully so if you ask me.

He got defensive when a bunch of people here jumped all over him telling him he sucked because some recent pop releases he mastered didn't have a DR rating of 17 or more. Yes, he was a bit angry. Any reasonable person would be in that situation. If you select your music based on DR numbers alone, don't fucking listen to modern pop. Brian came here to share his views on MQA but ended up facing a lynch mob instead. Although he can be blamed for taking the bait, the attacks on him were totally uncalled for. You all did a smashing job losing a good ally. Bob must be thrilled with you.

[PeterSt]

1 hour ago, Rt66indierock said:

I’ve had private email conversations with the now banned Peter Veth and it is my opinion you couldn’t become a member of his closed Facebook if you didn’t convince him you were pro MQA much less be listed as an administrator.

 

Stephen, FYI :

I've had private email conversations with Peter just the same and all I can say that I don't have any proof that I was invited to any Facebook group (I should be pro-MQA). Maybe I missed it.

[beetlemania]

2 minutes ago, mansr said:

He got defensive when a bunch of people here jumped all over him telling him he sucked because some recent pop releases he mastered didn't have a DR rating of 17 or more. Yes, he was a bit angry. Any reasonable person would be in that situation. If you select your music based on DR numbers alone, don't fucking listen to modern pop. Brian came here to share his views on MQA but ended up facing a lynch mob instead. Although he can be blamed for taking the bait, the attacks on him were totally uncalled for. You all did a smashing job losing a good ally. Bob must be thrilled with you.

 

Yes, I saw the predictable car wreck when people were taking shots at Lucey's livelihood (and derailed the thread) but missed the part where Mr Connaker banned him. Then again, Mr Connaker was among those hucking the molotov cocktails.

 

sigh

[opus101]

9 minutes ago, mansr said:

He got defensive when a bunch of people here jumped all over him telling him he sucked because some recent pop releases he mastered didn't have a DR rating of 17 or more. Yes, he was a bit angry. Any reasonable person would be in that situation.

 

Ah this must be some strange new usage of the word 'reasonable' that I wasn't previously aware of.

[beetlemania]

1 hour ago, opus101 said:

 

Ah this must be some strange new usage of the word 'reasonable' that I wasn't previously aware of.

 

Here's what I wrote in that thread after many threw rocks at Lucey:

 

LOL, yeah, none of you are "attacking" Brian Lucey. You're merely giving him unsolicited critiques of how he's doing his job wrong. Each of you would be totally cool with random people giving uninformed critiques of your work, right? This after he forcefully weighed in on mqa (with barely any recognition from posts here) and went off topic to explain the "loudness war" and his limited ability to address it.

 

SMH.

 

So, yes, it's reasonable that he was angered.

[opus101]

8 minutes ago, beetlemania said:

 

So, yes, it's reasonable that he was angered.

 

Not with any normal meaning of the word 'reasonable'.  A reasonable person can be reasoned with - that's being reason-able. An angered man cannot.

 

Uninformed criticisms of a professional's work are simply laughable to any reasonable person. Not to be taken seriously enough to elicit anger.

[esldude]

13 minutes ago, beetlemania said:

 

Here's what I wrote in that thread after many threw rocks at Lucey:

 

LOL, yeah, none of you are "attacking" Brian Lucey. You're merely giving him unsolicited critiques of how he's doing his job wrong. Each of you would be totally cool with random people giving uninformed critiques of your work, right? This after he forcefully weighed in on mqa (with barely any recognition from posts here) and went off topic to explain the "loudness war" and his limited ability to address it.

 

SMH.

 

So, yes, it's reasonable that he was angered.

No, I don't agree.  You are leaving out his saying those who disagreed with his mastering were old.  Nor his well known disdain for audiophiles expressed elsewhere.  He came here with a not a chip, but a huge block on his shoulder about audiophiles and hair trigger ready to react. Quite a bit of the early responses about his mastering he could have ignored and stuck to MQA.  Instead he made multiple posts expressing how he was somebody, he was busy, he was in demand and audiophiles were nobody at the end of the chain with no basis for even expressing an opinion.  Then every so often he would say he wanted to talk about MQA.  

 

Now not everyone needs to be an ultimate politician at sticking to the important topics and ignoring going off topic.  That wasn't Brian's problem here.  He immediately became aggressive and started out quite arrogant.  Any surprise with the response he received? No.  

 

While it would have been nice to manage a bridge of communication to keep him around for his knowledge, experience and POV, it was clear he never had any intention of that being the style of posting here.  He was right, other views were errant by definition and that was going to be that because everyone else was no one anyway.