MQA is Vaporware

[rickca]

Just now, labjr said:

Seems like they're just doing one MQA article after another because it generates traffic on their site.

Exactly.

[Brinkman Ship]

4 minutes ago, labjr said:

Seems like they're just doing one MQA article after another because it generates traffic on their site.

 

Also an article by Bill Leebens who worked briefly for Light Harmonic until he realized being involved in a ponzi scheme wasn't good for his career.

agree...and also a lame attempt at some clawback to regain some shred of credibility.

 

LH? Why are those people not in jail? Probably to the legal protections built into the crowdfunding fine print.

[firedog]

1 hour ago, Brinkman Ship said:

LH? Why are those people not in jail? Probably to the legal protections built into the crowdfunding fine print.

Basically, with crowdfunding ALL the risk is on the consumer. You are not investing in the company, you are speculating that the company is honest and will also succeed in producing the product. If either isn't true, you lose your money. That's what you agree to.

 

I put a very small amount ($25 ) into a gadget. After a few months it became clear the principals were crooks and had no intention of actually making or shipping a product. This was at indiegogo. After about 2 years of complaints from those of us who had been ripped off, they closed the product to further "investment" by consumers.

That was the extent of what they were willing and able to do. Indiegogo got their cut, and they were safe and legally protected. 

[Brinkman Ship]

2 minutes ago, firedog said:

Basically, with crowdfunding ALL the risk is on the consumer. You are not investing in the company, you are speculating that the company is honest and will also succeed in producing the product. If either isn't true, you lose your money. That's what you agree to.

 

I put a very small amount ($25 ) into a gadget. After a few months it became clear the principals were crooks and had no intention of actually making or shipping a product. This was at indiegogo. After about 2 years of complaints from those of us who had been ripped off, they closed the product to further "investment" by consumers.

That was the extent of what they were willing and able to do. Indiegogo got their cut, and they were safe and legally protected. 

Yes, it is clear that they make sure the risks are all noted in the fine print, and of course, this has been exploited by scumbags pretending to be actual designers, manufacturers, and entrepreneurs.

 

To be fair I have crowd funded a few low ticket items and a bunch of CDs, and I took delivery of every one of them.

[labjr]

9 minutes ago, firedog said:

Basically, with crowdfunding ALL the risk is on the consumer. You are not investing in the company, you are speculating that the company is honest and will also succeed in producing the product. If either isn't true, you lose your money. That's what you agree to.

 

I put a very small amount ($25 ) into a gadget. After a few months it became clear the principals were crooks and had no intention of actually making or shipping a product. This was at indiegogo. After about 2 years of complaints from those of us who had been ripped off, they closed the product to further "investment" by consumers.

That was the extent of what they were willing and able to do. Indiegogo got their cut, and they were safe and legally protected. 

Everyone knows what crowd-funding is supposed to be.

 

However,  LH and company purposely misused the platform to take people's money and deprive them of any recourse. And  even deliberately switched to indiegogo because your money is taken at the time of the pledge.  indiegogo has a history of doing zero when it comes to complaints about fraud. 

[Brinkman Ship]

1 minute ago, labjr said:

Everyone knows what crowd-funding is supposed to be.

 

However,  LH and company purposely misused the platform to take people's money and deprive them of any recourse. And  even deliberately switched to indiegogo because your money is taken collected at the time of the pledge.  

I think carnival barker Gavin Fish deserves to be nailed to the wall as well...he was the mouthpiece.

Larry Ho should be in handcuffs.

[firedog]

1 hour ago, labjr said:

Everyone knows what crowd-funding is supposed to be.

Not really. In the little scam I was ripped off in, there were people who for years posted messages asking when they were going to get their money back and asking why they couldn't sue Indiegogo. 

And this wasn't that long ago.

[labjr]

32 minutes ago, firedog said:

Not really. In the little scam I was ripped off in, there were people who for years posted messages asking when they were going to get their money back and asking why they couldn't sue Indiegogo. 

And this wasn't that long ago.

Indiegogo is made for scammers. There should be protections for buyers, because scammers are always smarter than buyers. And just because you can get over on people with small print contract language doesn't mean you won't be held accountable at some point. 

 

I contacted the indiegogo CEO on Twitter, Facebook, email and everywhere I could. Absolutely no response ever. They don't care.  Don't use indiegogo. I'll slam them every chance I get.

[Nikon Nutter]

On 2018/4/12 at 12:23 AM, Brinkman Ship said:

I think carnival barker Gavin Fish deserves to be nailed to the wall as well...he was the mouthpiece.

Larry Ho should be in handcuffs.

 

Larry Ho I saw at a Shanghai Show plugging the da vinci dac and some larry ho labs produucts for 1k usd. Lots of people talking to him. The local shop to me a nice guy did a sale as he boiught some units to resell.

[Brinkman Ship]

1 hour ago, Nikon Nutter said:

 

Larry Ho I saw at a Shanghai Show plugging the da vinci dac and some larry ho labs produucts for 1k usd. Lots of people talking to him. The local shop to me a nice guy did a sale as he boiught some units to resell.

He probably doesn't dare step foot in North America...

[Pete-FIN]

On 11.4.2018 at 5:03 PM, Brinkman Ship said:

In the May issue of Stereophile:

 

"...a smartphone that offers both hi-rez and MQA playback..

 

Speaking of MQA, Jim Austin continues his series of articles examining aspects of thoi controversial codec" (typo on website)

https://www.stereophile.com/content/hitting-newsstands-mailboxes-week-our-may-issue#wD51QTX0iIusSLjT.99

I didn't find link to Jim Austins new article. I guess it's not online yet. When it is online, I'd appreciate for directions to find it, thanks.

[firedog]

https://community.roonlabs.com/t/mqa-and-room-correction/22634/29

Link to excerpt from latest Stereophile article about MQA;

Deals with Volume Control and DRC with MQA.

 

Is this actually new, as suggested? Or is this just saying you can have digital VC and DRC between the first unfold in software and the DAC? In this case is your DAC/renderer still applying the MQA filtering and upsampling?

[mansr]

4 hours ago, firedog said:

https://community.roonlabs.com/t/mqa-and-room-correction/22634/29

Link to excerpt from latest Stereophile article about MQA;

Deals with Volume Control and DRC with MQA.

 

Is this actually new, as suggested? Or is this just saying you can have digital VC and DRC between the first unfold in software and the DAC? In this case is your DAC/renderer still applying the MQA filtering and upsampling?

It's not new. All it does is copy the LSB from the output of the core decoder to the processed stream sent to the renderer. The MQA-provided library even provides functions for doing this (presumably so they won't need to tell anyone what they actually do).

 

Now combining MQA with room correction is a strange concept. The first thing the room correction software will do is try to compensate for the distortions added by the renderer. It would seem more efficient simply not include those in the first place, i.e. use a normal DAC upsampling filter.

[mcgillroy]

Anybody read the Austin piece on MQA DRM?! Curios to hear how they spin it.

[beetlemania]

25 minutes ago, mcgillroy said:

Anybody read the Austin piece on MQA DRM?! Curios to hear how they spin it.

 

Austin says it's not DRM - I know you're shocked! - but allows space for alternative interpretations.

[christopher3393]

6 minutes ago, beetlemania said:

 

Austin says it's not DRM - I know you're shocked! - but allows space for alternative interpretations.

 

Is that different from "alternative facts"? 

[labjr]

9 minutes ago, beetlemania said:

 

Austin says it's not DRM - I know you're shocked! - but allows space for alternative interpretations.

It's not lossy either.

[psjug]

So nothing on deblurring?  I thought deblurring was the next subject in his MQA series.

[beetlemania]

20 minutes ago, labjr said:

It's not lossy either.

I think he wrote that it *is* lossy but quickly added that the discarded bits don't matter, or something to that effect. I can't believe we're still talking about this crap. Isn't MQA dead yet?

 

Meanwhile, every "hi-res" file I've seen on TIDAL (via Roon) is MQA'ed. Can we haz Qubuz yet?

[crenca]

1 minute ago, beetlemania said:

I think he wrote that it *is* lossy but quickly added that the discarded bits don't matter, or something to that effect. I can't believe we're still talking about this crap.

 

In the alternative universe of Audiophiledom promoted by Stereophile and the like, down is up, blue is green, and a product that is not only DRM but a good example of it is somehow not what it is.

 

Such Twilight Zones begin and end with talk and so the talk is endless...

[crenca]

38 minutes ago, beetlemania said:

 

Austin says it's not DRM - I know you're shocked! - but allows space for alternative interpretations.

 

I have not read this piece but I am familiar with Austins thinking/rhetoric from the Roon forum.  He is one of those guys who twists and turns so much you wonder if he is really not just trying to convince himself.  

[labjr]

I'm tired of MQA articles in Stereophile. They're only doing it to attract attention because from the controversy.

[beetlemania]

37 minutes ago, labjr said:

I'm tired of MQA articles in Stereophile. They're only doing it to attract attention because from the controversy.

 

My guess is that it's JA's way of walking back his hype.

[runnin17]

Well Stereophile just got rid of a bunch of long time employees I believe. I know they are owned by a different company now and cleaning house, but they have been toeing the line of bias for a good long while now IMO.

[Brinkman Ship]

Shoudn't Jim Austin at this point just be marginalized and basically ignored? What makes his writing even more

galling is he is an academic.