Jump to content
Rt66indierock

MQA is Vaporware

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, FredericV said:


MQA gets away with it, here's why:
 

 

 

Right, we don't need 24 bits resolution and maybe 15-17 bits is enough.

 

On the technical issues with un-decoded MQA, there has been a bit of a mixed message in the past discussion - some saying it's worse than redbook CD.

 

Are we now all in agreement it's not worse (technically) than CD quality? Putting potential DRM aside for a small moment.

 

@mansr has done the deepest analysis I believe. What are your thoughts mansr at present? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, FredericV said:

This means the first unfold has no purpose. The first unfold just recovers one more octave in the ultrasonic range, which we can't hear.

 

Certainly not. MQA lives by tolerating aliasing from above 48kHz. Given the nature of music the impact on the audible band is negligible (at least in some cases).

 

But they cannot tolerate aliasing from the 24-48kHz band, it would simply overwhelm the music's highest audible octave. And MQA also cannot properly filter at 24kHz, because filters are evil. So they have to pass on 96k, in this case via the (Japan-invented) origami method.


perception = controlled hallucination, hallucination = uncontrolled perception

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Em2016 said:

Are we now all in agreement it's not worse (technically) than CD quality?

 

I fully expect, sooner or later, objective proof that the filtering necessary for the origami band splitting is damaging to the quality of the CD-rate baseband signal in MQA.

 


perception = controlled hallucination, hallucination = uncontrolled perception

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Em2016 said:

Right, we don't need 24 bits resolution and maybe 15-17 bits is enough.

12 bits is enough for a lot of music, especially with noise shaping at 96 kHz or higher sample rate.

 

11 minutes ago, Em2016 said:

On the technical issues with un-decoded MQA, there has been a bit of a mixed message in the past discussion - some saying it's worse than redbook CD.

 

Are we now all in agreement it's not worse (technically) than CD quality? Putting potential DRM aside for a small moment.

 

@mansr has done the deepest analysis I believe. What are your thoughts mansr at present? 

Undecoded MQA has to be worse than CD since it has at most 15 bits of accessible data compared CD's 16. That's before we even start looking at potential damage from the band-splitting filters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, mansr said:

Undecoded MQA has to be worse than CD since it has at most 15 bits of accessible data compared CD's 16.

 

Noted.

 

But it's worse in the same way that a 16bit 44kHz CD is worse than the 24bit 44kHz Hi-Res master it was made from (as an example)?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Em2016 said:

Noted.

 

But it's worse in the same way that a 16bit 44kHz CD is worse than the 24bit 44kHz Hi-Res master it was made from (as an example)?

 

Going from 24-bit to 16-bit is unlikely to be audible. Removing another 8 bits is definitely audible. MQA sits in the intervening, maybe audible region. The result depends on the music.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The other major MQA shill at Stereophile, is starting his CES reports with as many mentions of MQA as possible.

He is painting the rosiest picture possible.  It seems he is buying the notion that phones are the "gate way" to high res. Yeh ok.

 

https://www.stereophile.com/content/ces-begins-hi-res-revelations-mqa-qobuz-and-more

 

https://www.stereophile.com/content/mobile-mqa-playback-lg

 

https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-expands-its-reach

 

I love the line, "Qobuz hasn't seen fit" to endorse and use MQA..."yet"...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

There's that name dropping again.  To the best of my knowledge, neither of these people are experts in data communications or bandwidth requirements.  Once again, you're parroting rather than informing.

 

I see you slagging CA over at Hoffman.  Just can't help yourself, eh?

 

 

I must have missed the "good faith" posts you have made here.

 

Hi,

The post by LeeS is disappointing - he states :

 

"As for engineering professionals at CA, perhaps. But why hide under assumed names? And how do we know how legitimate their engineering credentials are? Are they EEs playing with audio gear or have they done proper audio research and have solid academic credentials?"

 

I have asked Lee Scoggins for his credentials (in this thread) with regards to engineering on this site - he has not provided them.

 

My credentials are MEng in Electrical and Electronic Engineering, work areas include R&D in audio and visual telecommunications, broadband testing and engineering, satellite communications design (aeronautical/maritime/point to point links) which includes simulating carriers in transponders using relevant signal processing software.

 

Maybe others can provide some of their activities to allow Lee the confidence to provide his own.

 

Thanks and regards,

Shadders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Fair Hedon said:

It seems he is buying the notion that phones are the "gate way" to high res.

That is the latest MQA talking point.  


NUC7PJYH/AL --> Berkeley Alpha USB --> Jeff Rowland Aeris --> Jeff Rowland 625 S2 --> Focal Utopia 3 Diablos with 2 x Focal Electra SW 1000 BE subs

 

i7-6700K/Windows 10/HDPLEX 200W/HDPLEX 400W DC-ATX --> ISO REGEN/LPS-1.2 --> iFi iDSD Micro --> Focal CMS50's 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, rickca said:

That is the latest MQA talking point.  

 

Is this focus on mobile wrong?  I work on digital transformations a bit at work and the mobile focus is real among consumers.  How can a new music format attract customers at scale if they don't offer mobile access?

 

To me this is a key selling point of streaming.  One of the things I like about my Tidal subscription is being able to try new music in real time while shopping at record stores.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe Disney should buy MQA.  They could put it in Fantasyland.


NUC7PJYH/AL --> Berkeley Alpha USB --> Jeff Rowland Aeris --> Jeff Rowland 625 S2 --> Focal Utopia 3 Diablos with 2 x Focal Electra SW 1000 BE subs

 

i7-6700K/Windows 10/HDPLEX 200W/HDPLEX 400W DC-ATX --> ISO REGEN/LPS-1.2 --> iFi iDSD Micro --> Focal CMS50's 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Fair Hedon said:

Gee, I wonder how the site owner feels about this place being called a "snake pit"...

 

Very classy of Mr.Scoggins. He bumbles over here and posts like an uninformed boob, gets

put straight, and runs off to cry at Hoffman. Nice.

 

At the very least, his industry coddling, uncritical, and consumer un-friendly stance has been exposed and anyone who chooses to read his "articles" going forward will know they were done with a minimum of research and due diligence.

 

So something was gained here.

 

Sigh, more personal attacks.  Do you not know how to debate without constant attacks on my character?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Fair Hedon said:

It seems he is buying the notion that phones are the "gate way" to high res. Yeh ok

 

Smartphones is the currently the most reliable growth market for music consumption today, so it makes sense MQA is embracing phones.

 

The alleged relationship between smartphone music streaming and demand for high resolution audio is quite a stretch.  Hi rez is still a tiny, tiny niche of total music consumption.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

There's that name dropping again.  To the best of my knowledge, neither of these people are experts in data communications or bandwidth requirements.  Once again, you're parroting rather than informing.

 

I see you slagging CA over at Hoffman.  Just can't help yourself, eh?

 

 

I must have missed the "good faith" posts you have made here.

 

 

Hey, I'm just reporting what I heard from fellow journalist and audio enthusiasts about CA.  I am accurately reporting the reputation of CA among many.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Lee Scoggins said:

 

Hey, I'm just reporting what I heard from fellow journalist and audio enthusiasts about CA.  I am accurately reporting the reputation of CA among many.

 

No, you're attacking the credibility of MQA skeptics.  Your industry sycophancy is laid bare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

Smartphones is the currently the most reliable growth market for music consumption today, so it makes sense MQA is embracing phones.

 

The alleged relationship between smartphone music streaming and demand for high resolution audio is quite a stretch.  Hi rez is still a tiny, tiny niche of total music consumption.

 

Smartphones are the trojan horse here.  Sell the catalog depth and convenience to gain customers then MQA goes along for the ride.  This is the point I made in my article.  

 

Hirez interest is small which is why you can't go the other way by building a SACD or DVD-Audio disc then trying to gain consumer attention.

 

MQA and the labels are betting, and I think rightly so, that the best way to attract customer is through convenience.  My guess is a strong manager at Universal may not know how many "hirez" subscriptions he will sell nor will he care as long as he gets enough annuity income via monthly subscriptions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

No, you're attacking the credibility of MQA skeptics.  Your industry sycophancy is laid bare.

 

Except that doesn't hold true either as some of these guys with a low opinion of CA are MQA skeptics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

The sense I get is that Bob Stuart has created something clever here and the armchair engineers on CA can't keep up with his math.

I have an M.Eng in Information Systems with a focus on optimization and simulation.  It is math, math and more math.


NUC7PJYH/AL --> Berkeley Alpha USB --> Jeff Rowland Aeris --> Jeff Rowland 625 S2 --> Focal Utopia 3 Diablos with 2 x Focal Electra SW 1000 BE subs

 

i7-6700K/Windows 10/HDPLEX 200W/HDPLEX 400W DC-ATX --> ISO REGEN/LPS-1.2 --> iFi iDSD Micro --> Focal CMS50's 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...