MQA is Vaporware

[Rt66indierock]

2 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

How much Chinese music is available in MQA?

 

Possibly a decent amount. I'll try to find out. 

[Rt66indierock]

5 hours ago, Daccord said:

 

I bought the download because Tidal streaming was screwing up, as happens from time to time. My joke was that MQA must have a deal with 7digital to hobble download speeds. That not may be the real reason, but downloads from 7digital have been really slow for a while now.

 

7digital is struggling to survive. They lost Onkyo Music about the same time they got additional capital.

[Rt66indierock]

The goat will have a few comments on civility Andy.

 

Chris I see some interesting revisions of history about MQA recently. I’ll go after John Darko’s memory failure on Audio Asylum. Did he think I threw our emails away?
 

[Rt66indierock]

6 hours ago, daverich4 said:

What on earth are you blathering on about now?

 

It never occurred to you Andy and I are friends did it?

 

The comment to Chris you wouldn't understand.

[Rt66indierock]

1 hour ago, christopher3393 said:

 

Congrats! Looks like you got him right where you want him!

 

 

 

The goats in my neighborhood keep their dog friends in better shape.

[Rt66indierock]

6 hours ago, bobbmd said:

@ARQuint well well and thank you very much... happy new year...but i really stuck my nose where it didn't belong especially in a thread i could really care less about except( i enjoy all forms and formats of music and am purely a subjectionvist if there is such a word!) for the  gross examples of incivility that seems to pervade many other threads here lately thanks again not a bad comment and observation for a newbie

 

In my case I want the least processing in my music possible so no MQA, DSD only in limited cases as a sound effect and of course I see no reason to bother with hi-res. 

 

If you are purely subjective you aren't measuring the most important part of the system, you. 

 

As for the incivility in this thread, you are seeing the politics of high end audio laid bare for all to see. For me 
I have many people now I can ask to test things, measure and listen. A community was created to fight MQA. It will endure because we are a group of like minded people. One of the things we like is transparency to achieve it demands measurements sorry. 

[Rt66indierock]

16 minutes ago, ARQuint said:

 

I think that progress is being made on the civility front, a reflection of how Chris wants this community to function. For me, that's substantive.

 

Andy, my thread is more civil because the people disrupting it have realized they are losing. If the hip hop folks are right Tidal may not be long for this world so goodbye to MQA streaming for most of the world. You of course are welcome to listen to C Pop MQA but I'm going to pass. And as I've predicted many times things are smoothing out and will be less volatile as MQA fades away.

 

I any case the battle has moved to whether high resolution audio has value in consumers listening rooms. 

 

The Blue Goat will have a few comments on civility and a history lesson just for you and the thought police in a new thread. Discussing civility on this thread is just littering. 

[Rt66indierock]

12 hours ago, tmtomh said:

 

I agree that progress is being made on the civility front.

 

However, I also agree with those who say that you continue to misrepresent the conversation in this thread. Yes, there have been many antagonistic comments, some justified IMHO and some gratuitous and unnecessary. And there also have been many, many important, substantive comments that have brought information to light that would not have come out otherwise - and that despite your and others' steadfast refusal to admit it, clearly influenced the mainstream audiophile press and clearly played a role in some of the moderate walking-back of the earlier uncritical euphoria over MQA.

 

But most importantly, there's a third part of the conversation in this thread, and your repeated ignoring of it speaks volumes: the many, many posts by Lee Scoggins and several others that endlessly repeated MQA marketing lingo and technical talking points. These were not opinions to be disagreed with. Rather, they were demonstrably false claims, often contradicted by MQA reps' own statements. When someone keeps saying over and over and over that MQA is not lossy - and then finally "admits" it's lossy by saying. "it doesn't matter that it's lossy," that's not a disagreeable opinion - that's unaccountable, bad-faith behavior, and it doesn't deserve a civil response. 

 

And it's disingenuous in the extreme for you to keep banging the civility drum without calling out - or heck, just mentioning once - the shifty, bad-faith approach taken by Lee and some others in support of MQA. Unless or until you acknowledge that, you're not likely to find much of a welcoming reception here. You can of course continue to chalk that up the horrid incivility of members here, but to do that you have to ignore the many of us who are pro-civility and anti-MQA, and I would hope you'd not want to adopt such a simplistic and lazy posture here.

 

Don't forget Andy now works for Lee Scoggins.

[Rt66indierock]

Getting this back on track. One has to wonder why the posts about Bob Stuart and Peter Craven in the last few days. 

 

MQA is not making headway in the market. How do you listen to MQA files five years after the splashy introduction? In my case Tidal and a few download sites. I certainly will question why the press gave it so much attention. Raising a good question about the real influence of the audio press. Should be a good way to start the new year.

[Rt66indierock]

17 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

If MQA Ltd has received further funding, then this resurgence would make sense to me.

 

Or a shoe may be dropping on the high end audio press.

[Rt66indierock]

On 1/2/2020 at 11:48 AM, KeenObserver said:

There seems to be a recent resurgence of people that want to point out that MQA critics are an unwashed bunch of uncivil heathens.  These people are anointed from on high and know better than us.  We should just accept their pronouncements. 

 

By attacking us they are hoping folks won’t notice the authority figures in high end audio are an unwashed bunch of heathens whose expertise should be questioned 24/7. Consider.

As several Stereophile readers have wryly noted John Atkinson looks pretty scruffy at times.

Nobody can tell me where Robert Harley got his degree.

Steven Stone’s background in photography and his admitted hearing loss don’t inspire confidence.

John Darko was a DJ.

Jim Austin’s meltdowns here, Audio Asylum and on pro audio sites are legendary.

Herb Reichert’s parroting of MQA talking points to me cemented his status as a sheep.

And what are my friend Andy Quint’s audio qualifications?

[Rt66indierock]

3 hours ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

You are spot on. But you have just scraped the surface. 🤪

I would like others to contribute. Everyone  should do a little research and chip in.

[Rt66indierock]

3 hours ago, christopher3393 said:

 

Please do go on! What about...Steve Hoffman, for example?   🐷

Another shining example of your incivility here. Or do you think Steve Hoffman just runs a web site?

[Rt66indierock]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Please note that I have zero audio qualifications

 
That has defined our interactions in a lot of ways.

 

PS if you haven’t scratched records are you a real DJ?

[Rt66indierock]

4 minutes ago, christopher3393 said:

 

Apologies, Domine! Perhaps you don't recall in the moment that Steve Hoffman was, shall we say, maligned by one of your greatest supporters? Or, at least that's how it appeared. Crazy social media, eh? Some people have very short memories here about their own faux pas, but an infinite memory for those of their opponent. If we could move past the campaign posturings of  "Our side's" unblemished history, we might have something here.

 

Those of you that have been strongly anti-MQA ( which ,depending on what form, makes good sense!), do you have any regrets regarding any posts you made, some of which, while literally may have been "on topic" may have derailed more genuine conversation? I'll readily say that, imo, Lee Scoggins acquitted himself very poorly here and elsewhere for reasons that were laid out best by firedog and tmtomh among others. And there were at least a couple of others that struck me as zealots of a hobby fanatic or die-hard advert type.

And I welcomed the helpful summaries of Archimago, Chris Connaker  and Jud. As well as Mansr's crucial efforts.  In fact after this thread was going for a month or two, I tested Tidal MQA for myself for a few hours. My results were inconclusive at the time, but that was enough for me to drop Tidal. I had committed a lot of time to organizing Tidal so it was loss in some ways to give up. And I'm an avid listener with somewhat unusual taste.

 

But no, not an industry dupe or a naive civility freak. So I don't fit your stereotype that some of you keep insisting upon, at your own convenience. I happen to think that this forum would be better served by a generally higher ethical standard. Look mat the 3 best examples of MQA critique from this forum! They maintain. Why don't more of you believe that these examples are the best way to go on this and some other issues?

 

...And now this will be called derailing and other specious things. So it goes.

 

Manage the damage.

 

 

I know Steve Hoffman and he has been anti MQA since I started keeping score in 2016. 
 

He has been criticized here for how he managed topics. He didn’t want conversations about MQA on his site and deleted a lot of stuff.

 

I've told you privately I disagree with you about ethics on this thread. And why I think I have pretty good grasp of ethics. Continuing to bring it up is an attempt to derail the thread.

 

Finally Christopher what I’ve done stop MQA didn’t just happen here. In fact I viewed high end audio as a very minor part my activities. It’s why many “luminaries” in high end audio are upset with me. 
 

I will be judged by the artists, recording and mastering engineers I spared the unnecessary expense of MQA. I’m fine with that and don’t regret anything I’ve said to fight MQA.

 

 

[Rt66indierock]

6 hours ago, Currawong said:

 

This reminds me a bit of the story told by a mechanic to which a car was towed. The owner stated "It's not the battery, I'm an engineer." or words to that effect. So the mechanic tested everything else under the hood, eventually coming to the conclusion, verified by testing, that it was indeed that the battery was dead.

 

My point is, attacking members of the audiophile press because they may not have some kind of engineering credentials has little merit, as I don't believe that qualifications alone, but approach to learning and understanding the technology behind a product is more important. By the same logic, being a well-known musician would surely be qualified to talk about musical playback, but if you've had any experience with musicians, they tend to know the least about the gear they use or anything technical involving sound. Regardless, just about anyone with any serious audio engineering knowhow is, or works for a manufacturer of audio gear.

 

I think that, more usefully, a better approach to reviewing or discussing audio technology would involve a more critical eye towards any technology or the claims within, or, like Stereophile does much of the time, a balance between subjective impressions and technical analysis. Some more caution and reservation when declaring supposed fact would be in order too.

 

Again though, I think the issue with MQA and the audiophile press is that a well-known friend of theirs suddenly came out and said that he was going to revolutionise music mastering and delivery and they believed everything he said without critically examining it. All the analysis from this forum was so full of noise, especially the abusive critique of the audiophile press, that for a long while it gave them an excuse to ignore everything as just noise from people with nothing better to do than make noise on forums.

 

 

I was talking about audio education. I was taught audio. My hearing was trained to hear differences. I wasn’t talking about engineering. Part of my knowledge was gained at places like Lucas Films. And I’ve mentioned clients that made movie soundtracks. Learned a lot outside the audio equipment industry.
 

A musician may or may not have the ability to evaluate sound equipment. My sister did and had a great stereo. My daughter does not.

 

Most of the audio engineering know how is in the movie, broadcasting industries or the government.
 

The audio press ignored valid criticism in 2015 and 2016. I’ve interviewed several people who warned John Atkinson about MQA. My late friend Charles Hanson was especially vocal. At the LAOCAS gala last month I talked with a Meridian dealer who warned Bob that it won’t sell. This is what the audio press ignored not forums. 
 

Reread my original post. What was it about? With Tidal in trouble just how am I going to listen to MQA in the United States?

[Rt66indierock]

4 hours ago, daverich4 said:

According to you he’s a good friend of yours. Why don’t you just ask him?

 

Another example of incivility. Do you know why we are friends?

 

[Rt66indierock]

On 1/5/2020 at 6:50 PM, Currawong said:

 

Given your experience, you're the kind of person I'd be interested in seeing equipment reviews from.

 

 

Be careful what you wish for. 

[Rt66indierock]

On 1/7/2020 at 6:00 AM, daverich4 said:

I’m not sure what’s uncivil about, after you said you weren’t aware of Mr. Quints background/qualifications, suggesting you ask him directly. I have no idea why you’re friends or even if you are. 

 

Daverich4, your comment was uncivil because Andy Quint’s lack of qualifications have been discussed enough that suggesting I ask him and I’m unaware of them is an unethical debate technique, repetition. I didn’t used to care about this too much until I started teaching continuing legal education (tax) In addition to continuing professional education (CPA’s). Teaching lawyers requires knowledge of debate tactics.

 

Andy is a friend because he is the only member of the audio press with the courage to meet me and face to face say I disagree with you. We disagree with a lot of things in high end audio. And I’m fine with that.

 

I took your comment as not realizing my list went from humorous (John Atkinson) to in Andy’s case rhetorical. I know the qualifications of the people on my list except for Robert Harley’s degree. As I’ve said many times consider my posts to be tests unless you are sure they are not. 

 

So, let’s look at the bio of David A. Rich PhD (even if you aren’t him) and ask a few questions I don’t know the answer to.  The bio says he is a member of AES High-Resolution Technical Committee. So, it is fair to ask:

Does he know the circumstances necessary in a listening room to even have the possibility to detect the difference between a high-resolution record and a CD quality recording?

Does he know the amount of ultrasonic musical energy present at a typical listening position?

Does know whether ultrasonic energy at the listening position is a good thing or a bad thing?

Finally, on January 7, 2020 HiFi+ posted “The Truth About High-Resolution Audio.” The author concluded “slightly increased smoothness of a 24 bit 96kHz recording in the middle ranges is worth having.” I disagree and cite the research behind MLP (Meridian Lossless Packing). I wonder if David understands why.

[Rt66indierock]

27 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I don't believe MQA is just the target of the moment. In the 12 years since this site started, no topic has received as much analysis as MQA. Because MQA ltd's stated goals included a single deliverable for all record labels (Bob said this in the MQA RMAF presentation I moderated several years ago), it has the ability to effect every music listener. This is a big deal for everyone who loves music, good sound, and choice. This is the sole reason in my opinion why MQA continues to draw criticism and analysis. All the other stuff would be meaningless if MQA was strictly a thing for 2L and the like.

 

Enjoying whatever floats your boat and enjoying the audiophile journey as much as the destination is a good thing. But, if what one enjoys, negatively effects many others, then we have a problem that needs a resolution. Joe TubeDac can use all the Synergistic Research fuses he wants and it won't effect me in the slightest way. Thus, live and let listen. 

 

 

 

MQA continues to draw criticism for the one deliverable point you mentioned, but it also continues to draw criticism because it doesn't do what  its supporters claimed it did and it exposed a large portion of the audio press as unable to grasp technical issues.

 

I received a lot of criticism whenever I criticized the high end audio press. And I've enjoyed it ever since I started paying attention to high end audio again in 2916. If this negatively impacts others the solution is simple the audio press needs to get more informed about audio.

[Rt66indierock]

17 hours ago, ARQuint said:

Archimago, I feel that your representation of TAS would be unrecognizable to most of our subscribers. We go months at a time without mentioning MQA and, while we cover the occasional tweakier accessory, at least 90% of our reviews concern bread-and-butter audio components—loudspeakers, amplifiers and other electronics, turntables, DACs, headphones, etc. We write those reviews with the complementary goals of laying out for the reader the basics of a product's design and the experience of living with it. Complemented by a substantial music section, interviews, show reports, and other long-form articles, TAS tries to entertain, inform, and provide both subjective and objective information to assist in making purchasing decisions. Audiophile Style, which has provided you with a significant platform to expound at length on your signature issue, produces the same kind of content, albeit on a smaller scale. The readers of TAS and that of AS own the same brands of audio gear and listen to the same range of music.The two publications get advertising dollars from many of the same manufacturers. It seems senseless to perpetuate conflict when we share so many of the same kind of peak experiences that make this a great hobby.

 

All publications—all intellectual enterprises—can improve and evolve, and I've been around TAS long enough to know that's our culture at the most basic level. Likewise, AS seems to be moving towards a more civil and inclusive sort of virtual community. We can bury the hatchet.

 

Andy Quint

 

 

 

 

Andy the only way the hatchet will be buried is if subjective audio journals bury it. Then take audio equivalent of the "Trail of Tears" to the Black Kettle National Grassland and learn how to measure audio equipment.  

[Rt66indierock]

1 hour ago, Ralf11 said:

maybe "Bury the Hatchet" was a Michael Lavorgna joke?

Bury the hatchet  is a peace gesture.

[Rt66indierock]

1 hour ago, christopher3393 said:

 

Well, that's a grossly insensitive tasteless comment. But all in a day's campaigning I guess. Carry on. 

 

 

Do know what the trail of tears is and where it ended?

[Rt66indierock]

8 hours ago, Confused said:

This example of MQA News looks like an excellent effort at "positive spin".  Some nice pictures though, as I mentioned in an earlier post, I particularly enjoyed listening to the Hegel / KEF LS50 system that is pictured bottom right.

 

Although the Arcam picture rather fails to convey that Arcam were showcasing a 16 channel surround system running from a 4K Blu-ray player.  

 

https://www.facebook.com/ArcamUK/

 

 

They needed to do something Tidal's latest financials (2018) show UK revenue was basically flat and United State Revenue  went down about 25%. 

[Rt66indierock]

14 hours ago, ARQuint said:

 

I am almost sure that 2L is doing just fine.

 

The above comment reminds me of Donald Trump perpetually referring to "The failing New York Times" because the paper says things he doesn't like.

 

The New York Times is doing just fine, too, in case anybody had doubts. At least I'm almost sure.

 

Andy, if they were doing just fine the following would have been addressed. The website would be updated so the store button would say where to buy since they haven't had a store since 2018. 2L used to be a site for people who liked Norwegian music to go. Without the store it is work to find this music and this customer base should have cared for better. That 2L hasn't done these two things causes me to wonder about other things like finances. 

 

The New York Times is doing just fine if you think a decline in revenue from 2005 to 2019 of over 40% is good. I don't. They are still struggling with their digital revenue model.