MQA is Vaporware

[Rt66indierock]

3 hours ago, ARQuint said:

 

The Aurender Conductor software update of mid-December (2.9.1) has a "switch" to disable the upsampling filter that's required to correctly render MQA  content. Below is what the option in the Aurender settings looks like.

 

Aurender told me that they did listening tests and felt that the filter benefited all content—having it did not represent a mistake or, to use their word when I last communicated with the company, a "shortcoming". As I see it, the idea that MQA-decoded files were given an artificial advantage because they were compared to non-MQA files that had been sullied by the application of the upsampling filter doesn't hold up. It's farfetched to believe that Aurender would intentionally degrade the sound of non-MQA content to give MQA a leg up—they know that the great bulk of listening that an A10 owner will be doing will be to non-MQA files.

 

Still, in response to the concerns raised by JA's reports and others, the  2.9.1 Conductor software update allows the upsampling filter to be defeated. I think this was a sensible decision. The A10's MQA-decoding capability is really not a critical feature of this excellent product and won't be a make-or-break factor in a consumer's decision to purchase one.

 

Thank you for the chance to comment on this confusing issue.

 

Andrew Quint

Senior Writer

The Absolute Sound

 

Andrew,

Thank you for joining our thread. But you are missing the point. I'm not interested in their intentions. If you run non MQA files through the MQA filter it does degrade the sound just as Peter Craven's patent intends. Remember I've had one in my office and listened.

[ARQuint]

I feel you've missed my point, Steve.

 

Most of the listening people will be doing with an A10 will be to non-MQA-encoded files. Why would Aurender degrade the sonic quality of their player, intentionally or not? The  company did extensive listening and concluded that the upsampling improved the sound of non-MQA codecs. Obviously, you didn't have the opportunity to listen to the A10 with and without the filter in-line. How can you be so sure that it's effect was negative? Especially, as you've said, you formed your opinion about the Aurender after the briefest of auditions.

 

Andrew Quint

 

 

[Rt66indierock]

51 minutes ago, ARQuint said:

I feel you've missed my point, Steve.

 

Most of the listening people will be doing with an A10 will be to non-MQA-encoded files. Why would Aurender degrade the sonic quality of their player, intentionally or not? The  company did extensive listening and concluded that the upsampling improved the sound of non-MQA codecs. Obviously, you didn't have the opportunity to listen to the A10 with and without the filter in-line. How can you be so sure that it's effect was negative? Especially, as you've said, you formed your opinion about the Aurender after the briefest of auditions.

 

Andrew Quint

 

 

 

It failed my sonic quality test after a brief audition like most things do. I've stated many times when I evaluate sound quality it is competitive.  I start with Pet Sounds and more likely than not it fails (greater than 50%). I keep going down my reference albums and after all nine it is probable (greater than 75% chance) it fails. Then I get to my reference recordings and not much is left. 

 

The company and I reached different conclusions. As we talked about at RMAF if you volume match the music I'm not going to criticize what you heard but I'm not going to accept it without verifying it for myself. I encourage everyone to do the same.

 

I listened to the A-10 the same way I listened to the Brooklyn DAC (I haven't listened to the + yet ) to evaluate the filters and the found the same thing sorry. And yes I listened with the latest software as I stated earlier. 

[Shadders]

Hi,

I do not understand the questioning of another person subjective experience. If one person does not like a specific filter on a specific DAC, then so be it.

It is like someone saying to another person, you must like the Chicken Tikka Masala dish from restaurant A more than restaurant B. When in fact, restaurant B is preferred - so why anyone is trying to tell another which restaurant dish is best, seems a silly exercise.

Regards,

Shadders.

[Rt66indierock]

2 minutes ago, Shadders said:

Hi,

I do not understand the questioning of another person subjective experience. If one person does not like a specific filter on a specific DAC, then so be it.

It is like someone saying to another person, you must like the Chicken Tikka Masala dish from restaurant A more than restaurant B. When in fact, restaurant B is preferred - so why anyone is trying to tell another which restaurant dish is best, seems a silly exercise.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

If you volume match I agree with you and said so. If you don't remember how to fool John Darko (and others) earlier this year. You do it with different masters and the MQA version of The Nightfly is louder so he would would prefer it.

 

This is all about reviewers and editors deciding what you should like instead of us deciding. After The Nightfly was released it became a standard for setting up live sound systems in the pro world and audiophiles used it to evaluate systems at shows and stores. And now Michael Fremer is trashing it. He can say whatever he wants but I choose to believe otherwise.

 

I said very early in the thread that people should have their choice of filters.

 

 

[ARQuint]

13 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

This is all about reviewers and editors deciding what you should like instead of us deciding.

 

Now I'm confused. "Reviewers and editors" didn't decide on (initially) applying the upsampling filter to non-MQA content in the A10, Aurender did. They thought better of it, no doubt in part because of the response from forums like this and, of course, JA - a reviewer and an editor.

 

You can't blame everything on us.

 

Andrew Quint

[mansr]

48 minutes ago, Shadders said:

It is like someone saying to another person, you must like the Chicken Tikka Masala dish from restaurant A more than restaurant B.

Restaurant MQA deblurs the recipe and delivers an end-to-end dining experience that recreates the dish exactly as it was cooked in India.

[Rt66indierock]

9 minutes ago, ARQuint said:

 

You can't blame everything on us.

 

 

We are certainly going to try in 2018. 

[esldude]

2 hours ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

If you volume match I agree with you and said so. If you don't remember how to fool John Darko (and others) earlier this year. You do it with different masters and the MQA version of The Nightfly is louder so he would would prefer it.

snip.....

 

 

The old louder file trick.  You would think eventually everyone could learn the importance of precise volume matching when comparing things.  It has to be step #1 when comparing things.  Without volume matching you have close to zero useful information.  Very close to zero.  This is true whether one is doing blind or sighted comparisons.  Even sighted many things you thought different suddenly vanish once volume is matched.  

 

Match Those Volumes when comparing. 

[mansr]

2 hours ago, Rt66indierock said:

If you volume match I agree with you and said so. If you don't remember how to fool John Darko (and others) earlier this year. You do it with different masters and the MQA version of The Nightfly is louder so he would would prefer it.

The Nightfly MQA version is also longer.

[Rt66indierock]

2 minutes ago, mansr said:

The Nightfly MQA version is also longer.

 

I agree I never liked to help set up a live system with the version of The Nightfly MQA uses.

[mav52]

Just some new MQA speak from  http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2018/01/mqa-streaming-goes-mobile-nugs-net-on-ios-groovers-on-android/

 

If MQA is trying to target mobility as a cure all for MQA , I really can't see young mobile users spending $$$ for MQA. 

[mav52]

19 hours ago, mav52 said:

Just some new MQA speak from  http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2018/01/mqa-streaming-goes-mobile-nugs-net-on-ios-groovers-on-android/

 

If MQA is trying to target mobility as a cure all for MQA , I really can't see young mobile users spending $$$ for MQA. 

 

 

PS Jim Austin part 2

 

https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-tested-part-2-fold

[FredericV]

According to hifi.nl MQA is coming to Roon:

https://www.hifi.nl/artikel/26306/MQA-ontwikkelingen-CES-2018.html

 

I wonder if MQA's first unfold will also be forwarded to third party players like HQplayer, or the software squeezebox player which we use in our own product, which does our own DSP.

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, FredericV said:

According to hifi.nl MQA is coming to Roon:

https://www.hifi.nl/artikel/26306/MQA-ontwikkelingen-CES-2018.html

 

I wonder if MQA's first unfold will also be forwarded to third party players like HQplayer, or the software squeezebox player which we use in our own product, which does our own DSP.

This has been coming and well known for over a year. The hold up is because of how Roon handles data differently than most apps.

 

 

[firedog]

4 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

This has been coming and well known for over a year. The hold up is because of how Roon handles data differently than most apps.

 

 

Yes. They said they had issues making it work to their standard for multi room playback, which they considered a must.

[FredericV]

1 hour ago, firedog said:

Yes. They said they had issues making it work to their standard for multi room playback, which they considered a must.

 

They can already stream DSD in multiroom by decoding it to PCM first so any endpoint client which does not have a DSD decoder can still benefit from Roon server converting DSD to PCM. When using logitech (software) players this works perfectly.

They could do the same for MQA. Decode to 24/88.2 or 24/96 server side and stream this to any endpoint. If the endpoint has an MQA decoder builtin (like bluesound) or a bitperfect endpoint with MQA attached dac, you could make exceptions and stream the MQA file directly to those clients.

Per zone you could make a config option to decode MQA server side or in/at the endpoint.

It's basically signalling the capabilities of the player towards the server. In case of Logitech, it can signal the max samplerate supported by the endpoint, the fact that it can do DSD, ..... with RAAT it should be very similar.

[firedog]

1 hour ago, FredericV said:

 

They can already stream DSD in multiroom by decoding it to PCM first so any endpoint client which does not have a DSD decoder can still benefit from Roon server converting DSD to PCM. When using logitech (software) players this works perfectly.

They could do the same for MQA. Decode to 24/88.2 or 24/96 server side and stream this to any endpoint. If the endpoint has an MQA decoder builtin (like bluesound) or a bitperfect endpoint with MQA attached dac, you could make exceptions and stream the MQA file directly to those clients.

Per zone you could make a config option to decode MQA server side or in/at the endpoint.

It's basically signalling the capabilities of the player towards the server. In case of Logitech, it can signal the max samplerate supported by the endpoint, the fact that it can do DSD, ..... with RAAT it should be very similar.

And your point is? Anyone can post speculations. They have to actually make it work flawlessly across lots of software and hardware platforms.

They didn’t say it couldn’t be done, they said it was taking time. I also didn’t get the impression it was their number one priority.

[fung0]

MQA at CES

 

1. According to a press release from the company, MQA CEO Mike Jbara will be "chairing a discussion focusing on the lifestyle trends and latest technology developments that are shaping consumer experience." Ominously entitled Music Streaming is Only the Beginning, the session will be held Wednesday, Jan. 10, 11:00-11:30am, in the Hi-Res Audio Pavilion, LVCC 14735. Anyone in Vegas, by all means let us know how it goes!

 

2. The same MQA press release lists several new licensing deals. One that struck me was nugs.net. MQA seems to be available for purchase, which would be an example of MQA moving beyond streaming and becoming an archival alternative to FLAC, et al. Also, MQA seems to be priced exactly the same as proper "HI-RES" audio. (Details of mastering differences are, of course, not available.)

 

3. Two points in the nugs.net FAQ are noteworthy:

Quote

What is MQA?

MQA (Master Quality Authenticated) is an award-winning* technology that delivers master quality audio in a file that’s small enough to stream or download.

What does the A for ‘Authenticated’ refer to?

Authentication refers to the fact that the music file has either been approved in the studio by the artist/producer or has been verified by the copyright owner.

 

It's distressing to learn that all those FLAC files I've been streaming and/or downloading are actually not "small enough" for those purposes. On the other hand, it's a thrill to discover that we can now buy "master quality audio" in genuine Master Quality format... and extremely comforting to know that, at the very least, "the copyright owner" has verified the file.

[FredericV]

42 minutes ago, fung0 said:

What does the A for ‘Authenticated’ refer to?

Authentication refers to the fact that the music file has either been approved in the studio by the artist/producer or has been verified by the copyright owner.

 

So the mastering engineer is no longer needed to authenticate MQA?

[asdf1000]

5 minutes ago, FredericV said:

 

So the mastering engineer is no longer needed to authenticate MQA?

 

Brian Lucey already confirmed on these threads, that he had nothing to do with the MQA versions of his recent works (Liam Gallagher and Shania Twain albums). He said these were done by the label.

 

[mcgillroy]

3 hours ago, fung0 said:

MQA at CES

 

1. According to a press release from the company, MQA CEO Mike Jbara will be "chairing a discussion focusing on the lifestyle trends and latest technology developments that are shaping consumer experience." Ominously entitled Music Streaming is Only the Beginning, the session will be held Wednesday, Jan. 10, 11:00-11:30am, in the Hi-Res Audio Pavilion, LVCC 14735. Anyone in Vegas, by all means let us know how it goes!

 

2. The same MQA press release lists several new licensing deals. One that struck me was nugs.net. MQA seems to be available for purchase, which would be an example of MQA moving beyond streaming and becoming an archival alternative to FLAC, et al. Also, MQA seems to be priced exactly the same as proper "HI-RES" audio. (Details of mastering differences are, of course, not available.)

 

3. Two points in the nugs.net FAQ are noteworthy:

 

It's distressing to learn that all those FLAC files I've been streaming and/or downloading are actually not "small enough" for those purposes. On the other hand, it's a thrill to discover that we can now buy "master quality audio" in genuine Master Quality format... and extremely comforting to know that, at the very least, "the copyright owner" has verified the file.

 

tl/dr: they don’t have much to show. No big bash, no major licensing deals, no significant new partners, just a few more sandbags to fortify against the tides of MQA scepticsm.

 

News about big companies, important engineers and musicians as well as Hifi-companies getting behind MQA have dried up. 

 

[mcgillroy]

Above all there is not a single metric offered in this CES MQA press-release: no number of albums available, streams streamed, DACs sold, new signups in the fold (pun intended), market reach and potential. No revenue to show, simply nothing.

 

 

 

 

[fung0]

4 hours ago, mcgillroy said:

Above all there is not a single metric offered in this CES MQA press-release: no number of albums available, streams streamed, DACs sold, new signups in the fold (pun intended), market reach and potential. No revenue to show, simply nothing.

 

This is what struck me initially: it's a press release with no real news hook. "MQA Announces..." 20 new licensees!, or 100,000 albums now available! - those would be newsworthy. But "MQA will have a booth?" or "MQA will host a half-hour discussion"...? Seriously? The fairly vague material about licensing deals is presented more as background, than as news. Odd way to do PR...

 

It is sad to see nugs.net jumping on the bandwagon, but given the number of formats they offer, I suppose it's just a tick-box move for them. Hard to imagine anyone choosing MQA for downloads, especially when nugs' default "Hi-Res" files are the same price, and "CD-quality" (presumably 16/44 FLAC) is usually significantly cheaper. I'm still converting SHN and APE files I accumulated over the years. Who'd want to do that again?

[Rt66indierock]

On 1/1/2018 at 3:24 PM, Norton said:

 

Thankyou for this  full and frank account. I genuinely appreciate it and will consider your posts in a more positive light as a result.  

 

I had already surmised that your industry connections were most likely to centre on financial matters surrounding artists and studios; but noting your last sentence, is this the full extent of  your motivation for  campaigning against MQA?  I'd feel even more well disposed to your arguments if I felt they were also being made with the audiophile interest at heart.

 

Norton,

 

To continue my background and answer your question I learned audio and developed hearing skills good enough to moonlight as a consultant from people at Tektronix who are linked to Reed College. One Reed graduate James Russell is credited for inventing a part of the technology behind the CD. In addition he created the first electron beam welder. I visited him more than a few times in Richland Washington in the seventies. He would still consider himself a nuclear engineer. Another nuclear engineer that crossed my path was Rodger Nichols the engineer on Steely Dan and many others. He spent some time at my alma mater Oregon State University.

 

As for audiophile credentials I have met everyone who designed the significant parts of my stereo systems. That would be Paul Klipsch, Roy Allison, Henry Kloss, David Hafler, Arnie Nudell and many gentlemen from Japan. I lost a beloved Sansui amp when I moved to DC and met the designer of the replacement amp at RMAF this year around a discussion of Toshiba transistors and why they work well in amplifiers.

 

My objections to MQA relevant to audiophiles are Tom Petty is thicker sounding when it should be thinner sounding. There is thinness to many other recordings I’ve listened to in studios, my office and home. And I have preliminary model of how MQA alters the sound and placement of instruments. But I haven’t tested MQA yet because my reference albums and the six I listed earlier in this thread available in Europe aren’t available in the United States to do even preliminary testing.

 

Norton when my reference albums are available I will write about how MQA alters the sound and invite others to repeat my tests and report what they heard.