MQA is Vaporware

[hineni]

What I'd like to see from MQA proponents is some acknowledgment that we have to give something up to get whatever MQA offers. They can maintain the trade-offs are worth it, but the denial of any downsides or dangers blows their credibility, IMO.

 

I'd like to see them acknowledge and address:

 

1) the possible loss of end-user DSP functions such as bass management, room correction and digital equalization,

 

2) the loss of freedom to choose the digital filter of one's choice for all digital files,

 

3) the prospect that MQA files may become the ONLY digital format available, even outside the streaming world, and MQA's efforts to extend beyond streaming, and

 

4) an accurate reporting of the DRM capabilities in MQA (not what people have promised or not promised to do, but the worst case scenario built into MQA). 

 

The market will decide if MQA is, on balance, good. But there has to be a balanced presentation of the facts. 

[Samuel T Cogley]

1 minute ago, Fair Hedon said:

+1.

 

Guffman is an ego driven forum, and a venue for Hoofman to shill. He claims he is getting in gear for "review", which he keeps and never returns, and the "review" never appears any where.

 

Here's his "review" of the PS Audio DirectStream with a note at the end:

 

Quote

So, it's going well. Hopefully I can convince PS Audio to let me keep using these in my work. It's quite an upgrade.

 

Like, forever. 

[mansr]

1 minute ago, hineni said:

What I'd like to see from MQA proponents is some acknowledgment that we have to give something up to get whatever MQA offers. They can maintain the trade-offs are worth it, but the denial of any downsides or dangers blows their credibility, IMO.

First they need to show that MQA offers anything at all.

 

1 minute ago, hineni said:

I'd like to see them acknowledge and address:

 

1) the possible loss of end-user DSP functions such as bass management, room correction and digital equalization,

 

2) the loss of freedom to choose the digital filter of one's choice for all digital files,

 

3) the prospect that MQA files may become the ONLY digital format available, even outside the streaming world, and MQA's efforts to extend beyond streaming, and

 

4) an accurate reporting of the DRM capabilities in MQA (not what people have promised or not promised to do, but the worst case scenario built into MQA). 

 

The market will decide if MQA is, on balance, good. But there has to be a balanced presentation of the facts. 

Excellent points.

[Fair Hedon]

1 minute ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

Here's his "review" of the PS Audio DirectStream with a note at the end:

 

 

Like, forever. 

a forum post...some review...lol...

 

it is widely known he is an incredible miser.

 

Like all trust fund babies, he has a huge sense of entitlement.

 

Ever hear of a "top" mastering engineer posting to borrow gear, studios, SACD players, etc?

[esldude]

1 hour ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

I don't know about you, but there are many who consider being banned from Hoffman to be a badge of honor. 

Well yes a badge of some kind.  A level of experience, understanding and integrity beyond those not banned there.  

 

Maybe there should be a logo or something. 

 

 

[esldude]

Oops 2nd double post today.  

[firedog]

2 hours ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

Think about this for a minute.

 

The original 24/192 file is being folded into a 24/48 file, then unfolded, then played back while streaming with no loss of fidelity to experienced ears compared to the original file.

 

That seems to indicate the claimed “17 bits” contains all of the music.

 

The triangular encoding must be robust.

If that is true then MQA is a cute engineering trick, nothing more.

 

But again, before this, you and all the other pro MQA people were writing about how MQA files not only are compressed, but sound better than the original.  You've now retreated to a position that says they are sonically equivalent. And we haven't tested to see that other conventional methods of reducing file size give the same result. 

 

So again, what compelling argument do we have to adopt a proprietary, closed format that is no better sounding than what we already have?  We've already established that file size isn't the reason. 

 

If it doesn't improve SQ, consumers and industry are better off remaining with the  conventional formats. Adding another format that demands a closed proprietary HW solution is bad for music consumers and for the industry. 

[Fokus]

Can we stop the personal attacks on these boring comedy characters, and please return to dismembering MQA and its politics?

 

[Archimago]

Thanks guys for the discussion around "aliasing" and "imaging" and proper use of the terminology.

 

But damn shame about the Hoffman thread...

 

[manisandher]

14 minutes ago, firedog said:

If it doesn't improve SQ, consumers and industry are better off remaining with the  conventional formats.

 

Agree absolutely.

 

It's strange, but the more I listen to MQA, the more it reminds me of DSD. Which makes me suspect that there's more going on than FFTs can show. If so, why the MQA guys can't communicate what's happening in a way people can understand is beyond me.

 

Mani.

[christopher3393]

1 hour ago, Fair Hedon said:

a forum post...some review...lol...

 

it is widely known he is an incredible miser.

 

Like all trust fund babies, he has a huge sense of entitlement.

 

Ever hear of a "top" mastering engineer posting to borrow gear, studios, SACD players, etc?

 

36 minutes ago, Fokus said:

Can we stop the personal attacks on these boring comedy characters, and please return to dismembering MQA and its politics?

 

 

Thanks, Fokus. Well put.

Fair Hedon: How is this not a personal attack? Weren't you just given a final warning?

[Samuel T Cogley]

7 minutes ago, christopher3393 said:

 

 

Thanks, Fokus. Well put.

How is this not a personal attack?

 

You sure are fixated on @Fair Hedon Chris.

 

I understand that being the self appointed Civility Police for the forum is hard work, but you seem to be approaching it with a level of gusto that, to me, implies something more personal as your motivation.

 

Consider that your contributions to this thread have only been in the vein of the Civility Police.

[The Computer Audiophile]

@Fair Hedon You had numerous warnings and second chances, but continued to personally attack people. This can't go on here at CA. Your account is now banned.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Here's a follow up from @Fair Hedon that I received via the contact us form.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Here's a follow up from @Fair Hedon that I received via the contact us form.

 

 

Classy.

[kumakuma]

8 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

Classy.

 

Classier than your comment about Charles Hansen...

 

 

[beetlemania]

8 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

Classy.

Almost as good as bashing a dead guy.

[eclectic]

20 hours ago, Indydan said:

 

 

Or maybe, he was pissed off to be on my chart! 

 

 

MQA "enthusiast"                        Reason for no longer posting on CA

Peter Veth                                                          BANNED

WitchDoctor                                                      BANNED

Lee Scoggins                            DISTRACTED by jumping between forums

Michael Lavorgna                    BANNED for telling someone to go fuck his mother

 

 

 

Time for another two columns - for "MQA Critics"

 

[mansr]

32 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Here's a follow up from @Fair Hedon that I received via the contact us form.

 

He has a point.

[Ralf11]

Lee, you made a comment ~~ 2-3 pages back on temporal acuity in the auditory system, citing Wilson, who makes speakers.

 

It is unclear to me how that has anything to do with MQA.

 

Nonetheless, here is a recent paper on the issue:

 

Oppenheim, J. N. and M. O. Magnasco.  2013.  Human Time-Frequency Acuity Beats the Fourier Uncertainty Principle.  Phys. Rev. Lett. 110(4): 44301 -44306.

[Lee Scoggins]

1 minute ago, Ralf11 said:

Lee, you made a comment ~~ 2-3 pages back on temporal acuity in the auditory system, citing Wilson, who makes speakers.

 

It is unclear to me how that has anything to do with MQA.

 

Nonetheless, here is a recent paper on the issue:

 

Oppenheim, J. N. and M. O. Magnasco.  2013.  Human Time-Frequency Acuity Beats the Fourier Uncertainty Principle.  Phys. Rev. Lett. 110(4): 44301 -44306.

 

Thanks.  Will try to get a copy to read.

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 minutes ago, mansr said:

He has a point.

No he doesn't. 

 

He claims I was OK with Lee's language. Absolutely not. I gave him a stern warning.

[Fokus]

The Fourier beating article has a sensationalist title. But in fact nothing out of the ordinary is going on.

 

And it isn’t very recent at all.

 

[Ralf11]

22 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

Thanks.  Will try to get a copy to read.

 

 

How does MQA offer anything with respect to temporal acuity?

 

That is the question you need to address...

[ralphfcooke]

There's a comment referring to the earlier reference which is also worth reading

 

https://arxiv.org/abs/1501.06890v1 

 

- this can be downloaded as a PDF, and the math included should be ok for anyone with a high school level diploma.