MQA is Vaporware

[FredericV]

22 minutes ago, PeterV said:

 

It has been clear for many others for years that you are the one who needs help. Your stupid threats like accusing me several times that I am shill or paid by MQA, followed with frequent threats that you will inform my employer ( of which you are assuming this is by now MQA...or then again not..?.) that I am active responsive to your BS is actually motivating me to play games with your sick mind.. haha.. You told me personally you want MQA 'killed'and then you cowardly blocked me for the 3rd time in 3 years so in our little Facebook chats. I saved it all just for fun, easy to make screenshots nowadays. Then this morning you mobilised Chris Conaker to ask me officially if I am being paid by MQA.. I replied open and honest to him. Then within 30! minutes a new name appears on Archimago's blog someone who is using parts of my reply to Chris is a desperate, sick attempt to incriminate me again on Archimago's blog. I herewith attach the correspondence in which everyone can see what you do and how you are trying to play this. Again you with a new alias or a friend is doing this.. again the same empty threat to inform my boss.. WOW..!  Well, I have sent an e-mail to Chris Connaker as well and am awaiting his reply. If anyone is sick than it is you: please look for a psychiatrist.. the sooner the better!

 

Don't you have a job to do? What robert is saying makes a lot of sense. No employer would tolerate the slander you post while being paid to sell petrochemical analyzers, as you are in sales. Anyone can lookup your profile. The fact that PeterV = Peter Veth = Pedro is no secret.

No normal person would invest so much time in attacking the MQA naysayers, unless they were either being paid by MQA, or had a serious issue. And still, you never managed to debunk any of our technical arguments, and not only my arguments, but also archimago and Mansr. You always go back to the go-listen argument, or the external authority argument such as Bob Ludwig and the 2L.no guy.

You always fallback to claims that we don't understand anything, but if you can't tell digital from analog, then I wonder who does not understand it. You also claim minimum phase is faulty.

We don't need to know the internals of an MQA encoder (which is kept away also from the studio, no studio has the encoder) to see what's wrong with MQA. This is called end-to-end testing.

[FredericV]

12 minutes ago, PeterV said:

 

Thanks for providing proof that you using a second alias on Archimao's blog. Coward!

What proof? Says the guy who posts as Pedro on archimago.

Still no debunking except evading the real questions about MQA. Why does it add so much aliasing? Why does it throw away anything above 48 Khz? How can this be authentic?

 

Can you please answer the questions in bold for me without using canned arguments like the external authority Bob Ludwig argument or go-listen argument?

[FredericV]

18 minutes ago, witchdoctor said:

 

The only authority you need is at the AES meeting, I hope you don't get laughed out of the place with your juvenile arguments when you go.

I actually spoke to a Dutch AES engineer. He completely debunked MQA in one hour.
AES engineers actually work with the spectrum plots as prestented:

 

 

[FredericV]

Just now, witchdoctor said:

 

All of the presentations at that meeting are vetted by the AES Technical Committee, if your friend has a problem he should bring it up with them:

 

http://www.aes.org/technical/rtp/

Two mastering engineers, and one scientist who knows how to code DSP. One of the 2 mastering guys in this panel (Bob Ludwig) is paid by MQA. So where are the real independent scientists?

 

Quote

We have 3 distinguished panelists to guide you through the new world order:

Bob Ludwig will speak about mastering high resolution audio and the differences between Mastered for iTunes and full high resolution media, downloads, streaming and of course vinyl.

Bob Stuart, co-founder of MQA will discuss how MQA can offer the highest guaranteed-quality streaming of even 352.8 kHz masters and tell you the basics of how it all works.

Ian Shepherd will discuss the various streaming services, how Loudness Normalization is the new paradigm, and the opportunity it offers mastering engineers.

"Guide you through new world order" sounds a lot like conspiracy theory to me.

[FredericV]

2 minutes ago, PeterV said:

 

oh yes..conspiracy theories lover you are Frederic..tell us about 432 Hz and the BS conspiracy regarding that occult nonsense. MQA 's new world order sounds nice to me:  resistance is futile haha!

 

Why can't you stay on topic? again you slander my company without any proof.

Here's actual proof:
http://432evo.be/documents/pdf/study.pdf

[FredericV]

32 minutes ago, PeterV said:

 

Because you are are using disgusting means to incriminate me by threatening me personally.  I disgust such behaviour and am confronting you now with your crappy lies and fantasies regarding your 432 Hz religion. You have no right to attack MQA since you are a fraud. 

Calling someone a fraud without proof is a serious accusation in Belgium. It's called slander.

You went for the ad-hominem route. You lose.
You already posted earlier on FB  that you wanted to expose me as the 432 pope.

I would advise you to seek help.

[FredericV]

50 minutes ago, PeterV said:

 

Excellent sense of humor PeterSt ..!  ff hapje eten voordat  ik straks Frederic weer een potje ga treiteren... ;-) Helemaal paranoia die vent in zijn panische gedoe om over mijn werk te gaan beginnen.. wat is die diep gezakt zeg..!

 

Translation:

I'm going to eat a little bit before I'm going to harass Frederic for a while.

Treiteren translation to English:

This is NOT accepted behaviour on CA:

(f)

Use the site to threaten, defame, abuse, assault, stalk, harass or otherwise violate the rights of any other person
 

[FredericV]

4 minutes ago, PeterV said:

'Well you've probably missed what our Belgian Frederic has tried to do today.. threatening to inform the company I work for that I am on the thread responding to his slander. I am fed up with this guy and my time for being polite to him is over , so sorry for that

 

The slander is on your behalf. You started all these ad-hominem attacks, and tried to shift this topic into a 432 Hz discussion, leading the discussion away from MQA, and leading the discussion into me to make it your personal war.

You violate the terms of this site by claiming you will "treiter" me, which means

[FredericV]

21 minutes ago, PeterV said:

Let's await Chris Conaker's opinion regarding the definition of slandering. First you blame me for being paid by MQA, then you misuse my reaction to Chris' question regarding this on Archimago's blog. Then you realize I am working at a1 and then you start threatening me to inform my management about my replies and what I do during the day...?

What is your problem? On your facebook profile it is stated for a while now that you worked for a1 envirosciences (past tense), not working for. So if you worked for a company, why even bother? As you claim you are no longer working for a1, why would anyone bother to contact your company?
 

Quote

You are a pathetic FRAUD who is afraid to loose his 432 Hz religion against MQA and that is why you are acting so aggresive towards me. Well..I am fed up with you big mouth full of sh*t and will indeed continue to reply just as agressive and fals as you are doing untoll you have apologised for all acusations you have made over the last Months. 

 

This is all slander.

You are just very annoyed that you no longer have any technical argument, and can't clarify several strange statements you have made.

For the record: we don't fear MQA in it's current state. We even have 2 MQA dac's to play with:

So what is your problem?

You made some very strange technical statements, like minimum phase is fraud: claims that show you don't understand digital.
When asking for an explication, or backing with evidence why minimum phase would be a fraud, you change the topic into ad-hominem attacks.

Calm down.

[FredericV]

28 minutes ago, PeterV said:

 

Do not deny your actions of today, I am fed up with you and you will have to face the consequences of your accusations. I told you personally that I am still working for a1 and I am not hiding behind phony aliases like you seem to take pleasure as was exposed today on Archimago.  I will not calm down until you will apologize for your appalling behaviour with your attempts to threaten me.

 

 

 

I can't speak for other accounts / aliases. I can only speak for FredericV and my former account here, which I gave up, as Chris wanted to have my affiliation posted. Which I did.

What happens on archimago's site is not subject to the rules on CA.
What happens via communication outside CA is not subject to the rules on CA.

So stop making ridiculous technical claims (like minimum phase is fraud) & relax. Listen to your MQA system and enjoy what you have. I also do that. My company exists 10 years in 2 weeks. Do you really think MQA is going to affect that? Zero chance. I even asked Mytek personally (to their lead dev) to have 2 Mytek dacs. Just because they are great dac's, independent of MQA. They know I have my reservations about MQA, but I still like their dacs. Last year Voir & Emouvoir was very positive about the Manhattan 1 in our new music 2016 setup (Brussels show) so we wanted to have the mk2 as it works great with what we have. The mk1 needed a proprietary driver, for which we helped develop the kernel drivers. We even want as far to contact the OSS dev of the stereo192, traced the changes in the USB receiver chipset, and gave back the feedback from mytek with what code needed to be changed, and we now have a manhattan mk1 linux driver since more then a year.

I just enjoyed a great Belgian Beer, Rochefort 10, as good as West-Vleteren. Please do something fun. If you are so sure MQA is here to stay, you have nothing to fear. Just relax with what you have.

Here my discussion ends with you, as advised by Chris.

[FredericV]

7 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Peter and Fredric - Take your conversation, that only you two care about, offline or to PM. 

 

This is your one warning. 

 

I agree. I posted my last reply to Peter. I have nothing to add to Peter's posts.

[FredericV]

6 hours ago, PeterV said:

So THIS shows the true face of FredericV vanden Poel !!

 

He actually did send an e-mail to my employer in order to incriminate me. It seems as if Frederic's life is at stake with his pathetic attempt to stop me from speaking out what my personal experiences are regarding MQA. I received a phone call from my management this afternoon that I am not allowed to use labour hours for private communications and that in principle I can be fired for that.  I requested Chris Connaker to ban FredericV from CA, but that will not be done because this behaviour did not take place on CA forum itself. I am therefore forced to expose FredericV despicable behaviour like this:

-----------------------------------------------------------

 

On 16/10/2017 12:17, Frederic Vanden Poel wrote:

I think Peter needs professional help or a new hobby. He has been posting all day long on computr audiophile, today monday 16/10/2017.
.....
 

Disclosing private emails between companies is not allowed by both Belgian and Dutch law. Furthermore these emails are incomplete and out of context as they lack the embedded content which prove the slandering. You are also  violating every privacy law in Europe. Since yesterday you started to call me a fraud without proof. You also changed the topic into attacking my product.

Which company would allow their employees to disclose private emails on public forum like CA, and attack other companies while being paid to do another job?

I defend myself because you continue to attack me, even though Chris has asked you to stop this and warned both of us with a ban. As no action has been taken to respect the privacy of email conversations, I can only react to what is happening here. I would suggest you to take it down immediately.

We will never be friends, but copy pasting private emails is not acceptable.
 

[FredericV]

54 minutes ago, lucretius said:

 

Sir, I appreciate your technical posts very much  and I am sure many others do also.  However, I fear that you are on a sure course to getting banned.  My only hope is that you will stand down from this craziness, so that we can all continue enjoying your posts at CA.

 

Kindest regards!

Rest assured that I want to end this crazyness.  But I hope PV also stops. Yesterday I made it very clear that I wanted to respect Chris wishes and no longer react to this specific person. I'm not in the mood to get banned. I did not react for a whole day, but saw the whole topic derail even more when emails were being copy pasted. That's why I react.

I hope it gets back on track. These private emails are not meant for a public forum. This is not wikileaks.

[FredericV]

1 hour ago, PeterSt said:

MQA in general sounds more white.

This should mean :

 

Less color in the cymbals (white sound is profound and not "copper" sound);

More robotic playback;

And the flavor itself (which is never a good thing).

Something in female voices was lacking for me in the MQA version vs the DXD version. There was the illusion of more echo & reverb, but at the cost of everything being thinner. When archimago posted the impulse responses of the renderer, it made sense why it sounded that way.

I yet need to find a piece with a lot of cymbals where I also have the original file that was used for the encode. Do you have such fileset?

I did this test on a Brooklyn + Vitus RI-100 + Amphion Two 18 in nearfield. In the same setup, I now also have a Manhattan 2 which I'm burning in for a few days. Will the Manhattan enlarge these differences? I intend to find out.

I have the Manhattan mk2 because it is a great DAC independent of MQA, and it's also a DAC that is used by the studio's.
If the Manhattan mk1 did not have the need for a custom linux driver, I would probably have bought the mk1 already. We used it on a show last year and the feedback was very positive.

I actually helped the Linux driver to recognize the Manhattan mk1 by tracing the correct USB ID's, and Jurgen patched it in:
https://github.com/lintweaker/mytekusb2/blob/master/chip.c
 

The manhattan mk2 just works out of the box on linux just like the Brooklyn.

[FredericV]

25 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

So for me counts : a 96KHz sampled file is still theoretically OK for MQA, but a 352.8KHz (DXD) is not (because it will be upsampled from 88.2 to 352.8). And thus, for me, there is no reason to even start thinking of comparing DXD with MQA (MQA will always lose for a for me too obvious reason)

 

That's why the first unfold does not have these issues. It's a band limited version of the master, without the new issues introduced by the second unfold. If MQA was just clever compression/folding without the issues plagued by the second unfold, and not calling this authenticated, I don't think we would even have this thread.

The first unfold is the clever part of MQA, usable for a limited time in a world with limited bandwidth in some parts. This is what Bob explains in the video from Jaap Veenstra, when he very cleverly works around the question why MQA has no +48Khz content (so equivalent of 24/96 sampling in terms of bandwidth). He discusses traffic caps and very expensive mobile subscriptions, which cost a multiple of the Tidal subscription in some countries. He has a point.

These advantages are only temporary. There will be a time when qobuz streaming will not be expensive in 24/96 flac via mobile in these countries. In Belgium, my 1 GB mobile limit has increased to 12 GB in just a few years. So what if it becomes 100 GB in a few years. That's a lot of flac mobile streaming. With 5G being introduced, these caps will automatically be incremented by not a small fraction,.
 

[FredericV]

37 minutes ago, firedog said:

I think that if the format gets well entrenched, we will see the use of it's DRM features to restrict access to better SQ, to eliminate non MQA versions, and (especially hi-res ones) and  to promote discriminatory pricing schemes. Why? Because theire isn't another way to make money from it.

 

This my biggest concern with MQA. For now the sox method works great with MQA files as an unofficial alternative. But if they start to enable crippling features it probably won't. The main problem is that we don't know if these features which are in the patent, are actually in MQA:

This is the patent that describes features to cripple undecoded versions:
https://www.google.com/patents/US20160005411

Now Bob Stuart claims in the interview with Jaap Veenstra that not all their patent applications apply to MQA. At the same time he denies there's crypto in MQA. But why does MQA uses crypto?

https://www.infosecurityeurope.com/__novadocuments/266589?v=636078256117430000

This is the interview where Bob denies the crypto:

What is also interesting is in the first minutes he debunks the need for 32 bit and also has some reservations about 24 bit.

At the same time, they are promoting a new 32bit fixed/192dB/352.8k DXD ADC and complete mastering workflow at their latest AES convention, while MQA encoding throws most of that away. In the video from Jaap, we actually learn that MQA is somewhere around 17 bits. So why capture in 32 bits 352.8K to keep an actual resolution of 17/88.2 (as DXD = 8x 44.1, they use 88.2 as first unfold for DXD) ?

http://www.aes.org/events/143/recording/?ID=5693

 

 

[FredericV]

7 minutes ago, realhifi said:

I disagree. This exchange has actually been enlightening. Not sure but did PeterV get banned or did he just decide to leave?  Also, is FredericV a manufacturer of docs?

 

What are docs? My affiliation is in my signature. But let's not change the discussion into my product. This is the MQA topic and I would like it to stay that way.

[FredericV]

1 minute ago, psjug said:

 

MQA may be clever, but in a Rube Goldberg sort of way.  As Miska pointed out a long time ago, why not just use 18/96 Flac?

 

 

There are some blanking initiatives, where the noise bits of the 24 bit capture are zeroed. As noise can't be compressed well when it needs to stay lossless, it costs a lot of bandwidth. Blanking the noise can achieve compression factors which are as good as MQA. It does not waste entropy thus bitrate can be reduced.

I believe both Dr Lesurf and Xivero suggested such workarounds.

http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/MQA/cool/bitfreezing.html
https://www.xivero.com/xifeo/

[FredericV]

32 minutes ago, mcgillroy said:

 

So you basically saying that parts of the industry view MQA as a chance to grow the high-end market?

Our industry is a difficult one. The younger generation doesn't really care about high quality. They just want instant audio in an acceptable quality. The current gen of audiophiles is almost at it's end. We have maybe 10 to 20y left. Look at CES: this year it was a flop, several years ago it was overcrowded.

So watching the RMAF video that Chris streamed, it was stated that MQA could bring the new generation to buy high-end, because they see the MQA light on their phone, and maybe get interest in buying more gear associated with high-end.

Someone once asked me: why do you attack MQA? Our business is already very hard, with MQA we give them a new reason to buy something. TBH I don't think MQA will save the business.

Some years ago I was hooked into the DSD hype. I actually had:

- antelope platinum
- auralic vega
- all iFI models including the micro DSD

I almost never used DSD. I had all my collection pre-rendered by foobar into 24/88.2 files and that worked very acceptable. DSD was just a checkbox on my feature list that I wanted to have. About a year ago, I decided to buy a new DAC based on sound, not on the fact if it had DSD or MQA. So i bought the Metrum Adagio, and some months later I bought the Vitus SS-025 to pair with it. The combination is magic to my eyes.

I wanted a DAC that had a very good performance with my existing collection, which is mostly redbook rips.

I was addicted to the sound of R2R dacs compared to my previous delta sigma dacs.
In the meantime delta-sigma is catching up with ESS PRO chipsets but not yet matching the SNR of R2R, this is why I also have a Mytek Brooklyn & Manhattan 2 to play with.

I want choice but don't care about MQA checkboxes. I buy these dac's for their sound or because it serves well in my lab.

The brooklyn is very interesting because it can show if S32_LE actually contains 32 bit or zero padded 24 bit.
This is my LAB dac, I pair it to a simple set of aktimate speakers to do some quick testing.

[FredericV]

1 hour ago, Shadders said:

Hi FredericV,

Can you clarify the meaning of the SNR of an R2R DAC ?

My understanding was that current delta sigma DAC's provided better S/N than R2R ?

Are you referring to the Philips R2R DAC IC which sells for £60 or more ?

Or a discrete R2R DAC such as MSB ?

The highest accuracy tolerance resistors i can find is 0.01%, which will not provide a THD better than delta sigma DAC's.

(i am assuming that S/N is also similar to THD).

Regards,

Shadders.

To get these specs, the trick is as follows:

By shifting the lower 12 bits of a 24 bit signal into a separate converter and threating them as upper 12 it has a unique architecture. The signal is matched with the 12 bits that were not shifted in the analogue stage, resulting in an astonishing -140dB S/N ratio.

It's digital + analog unfolding 24 bit into multiple dac's and then combining them in the analog domain, off course the dac that does the lower 12 bits but converted in the uppers 12 bits for optimal SNR need to be attenuated by 72dB if I can still calc 

This was with the Pavane, their previous model. It reached -140db noise floor. The Adagio extends on the architecture of the Pavane, and has a very clever volume control. It reaches -155dB noise floor.

What Metrum has done is much more clever in the style of "less is more". They control the volume by regulating the voltage on the ladder networks. This determines the max voltage at the output of the dac.

Some other manufacturers have an R2R network, after which they put another resistor based volume control, which you can hear clicking. MSB products and several others work that way.  The Metrum does not like pre-amps: if you put a pre-amp in between, you will most likely downgrade.

This is why I ordered the Vitus SS-025 after I invested in the Adagio, so I no longer have to use the resistor based volume control in my previous Vitus RI-100, which is now my backup amp. My RI-100 is now used for nearfield testing with Amphion One 18 and Two 18.

I used to have both Pavane and Adagio in an AB shootout:



The Adagio has a perfect impulse response. I've seen the measurements from Cees: there is no pre- or postringing, just a pulse and nothing else. So in case of Metrum, MQA can't correct what ain't broken. With delta-sigma it's different. A pulse going through up/oversampling always has ringing added by digital filters.

This is why MQA uses minimum phase, not to add pre-ringing. To get rid of the (accumulated) post-ringing, they try to suppress it in the renderer phase. I'm not convinced post-ringing is bad for music, only pre-ringing.  Our ears are sensitive to pre-ringing. Post-ringing is not an issue.

MQA's time smear argument only applies to delta-sigma dac's.
 

[FredericV]

12 minutes ago, Shadders said:

Hi FredericV,

Thanks for confirming. Not working it out, i assume the accuracy of the 72dB attenuation of the 12bits which will be the lower order bits, has less impact on the overall (less THD) than the use of 0.01% accurate resistors ?.

Thanks and regards,

Shadders.

It's more complex than it looks:

http://www.the-ear.net/review-hardware/metrum-acoustics-pavane-digital-analogue-converter-dac

They use this splitting to work around the problem you are explaining:

"But why manipulate the data stream? Well, whatever R2R converter is used, problems always arise with the LSB part, because the signal is smaller and at a lower level irregularities occur, non-linearity arises and digital noise becomes part of the analogue signal. "

[FredericV]

Just now, Shadders said:

Hi FredericV,

Thanks again. I wonder if the THD generated by a simple 24bit R2R ladder is audible ?, more than any non linearity caused by the dual 12bit R2R DAC summation?

Regards,

Shadders.

 

I'm not a dac designer, so I would have to ask Cees from Metrum.
But I heard tube dacs with R2R (Aries Cerat) as we partnered with them in Munich 2017. It sounded fantastic.

I believe there are more ways to Rome

In this ultra high-end price segment, almost nobody cares about MQA.

[FredericV]

1 hour ago, Fokus said:

 

Old tricks. Joining the DACs is problematic. 140dB SNR, much less 155 dB, is not feasible with such an architecture, in our universe, at room temperature, and with normal output levels. If Metrum claim this, they are being creative with the truth and their measurements.

They use an FPGA and forward correction to do this. This creative argument has also been said about MSB, one Dutch designer who is well respected told me the measurements of MSB are impossible. The select DAC claimed to do something like 26.5 ENOB, which is very close to Metrum's -155 dB SNR. I don't have the lab gear to verify these measurements.

 

Quote

 

 

Also an old trick. And guess what: there is no free lunch. This comes with its own set of problems.

 

 

Again that's why he uses an FPGA.
 

Quote

 

Perfectly wrong, you mean. If you think this, you don't even understand digital audio. Sorry.

Without the corrections that he applies, you are probably right. But I have seen the impulse responses. He posted them on a Dutch FB group. He also told in that FB group (Streaming Audio) Bob Stuart was very impressed with the measurements.

Let's not make this an MSB or Metrum bashing topic. I heard MSB at one of our resellers and was very impressed (this has been the best system I've heard for several years), also heard it at their HQ and was not impressed. Maybe the combination with Tidal & Thrax is not my taste, or his acoustics were not as good as my own reseller. The system that worked well had the wisdom L75, which are very tall line array ribbon speakers. This system had the analog dac, and every wall of his demo room was treated.

 

 

 

 

Quote

 

The leaky renderer filters are totally incapable of suppressing accumulated (i.e. production chain) post-ringing. I think you still do not understand MQA.

 

Indeed, that's why I write " They try to shorten the tail after the transient " in the article in my signature. I'm not claiming they are very successful in what they do.

 

[FredericV]

6 hours ago, Jud said:

 

A pretty reasonable number of the artists I like make recordings available in hi res, including relatively niche artists in places like Bandcamp, so it can’t be that inexpensive, inconvenient, or difficult for at least some studios.

You can release highres on a small budget. I was part of such project. This is why mastering and claims about mastering interest me.

I know a new-jazz band who recorded and mixed their own hi-res album in Pro Tools. They used 32 bit 48K as internal format, final files are 24 bit / 48K. We did a 432 conversion to it, just after the mixing. Then it was mastered and when they found a label to publish it, the engineer associated with the label did a second mastering using analog Manley gear. I heard every step of this process, from the first mix to the version for HDtracks. This was a very fun project to do.

This is not big budget production, but it sounds certainly not bad on high-end gear, and they are on Bandcamp. I would rather say the opposite as I demo these files on trade shows and a lot want to know what it is. At the end of the month, these highres files will be available on HDtracks.

https://timewarpmusic.bandcamp.com/album/tick-tock

So releasing highres on a budget is possible.

[FredericV]

59 minutes ago, mansr said:

Of course you can. It's hard to find recording equipment that doesn't support at least 96/24.

 

Indeed. My partner is a vocalist (hobby) and also sings in choirs. She has a Roland recorder that records highres to an SD card. And she has this device for several years. She probably does not even know it records highres  

 

Next month there will be another concert in the large hall of deSingel in Antwerp, so I'm going to sneak in this kit and record video with the Nikon D750.