MQA is Vaporware

[Rt66indierock]

6 hours ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

I wrote earlier this year: "as long as audiophiles can download or stream original, non-MQA, hi-rez PCM files, why should MQA be an issue? However, what if they no longer have such access to the originals, but only to their MQA versions? . . . Regardless of MQA's technical elegance and promised increase in sound quality, the removal of consumer choice in recorded music is indeed a relevant issue."

 

See https://www.stereophile.com/content/more-mqa

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

John I got the MQA Ltd. financial statements this weekend. Gotta love notes that discuss going concern, stock issued for services by the labels and why the deferred tax asset is not recognized. 

[Ralf11]

8 hours ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

I wrote earlier this year: "as long as audiophiles can download or stream original, non-MQA, hi-rez PCM files, why should MQA be an issue? However, what if they no longer have such access to the originals, but only to their MQA versions? . . . Regardless of MQA's technical elegance and promised increase in sound quality, the removal of consumer choice in recorded music is indeed a relevant issue."

 

See https://www.stereophile.com/content/more-mqa

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

 

Progress.

[adamdea]

On 9/23/2018 at 12:34 PM, John_Atkinson said:

 

 

 

You then get the advantage, as I described in my September 2018 article on A/D conversion - https://www.stereophile.com/content/zen-art-ad-conversion and was also touched on by Paul Miller in the July 2017 issue of Hi-Fi News - of more accurately preserving the time-domain aspect of the original signal. But again you don't get something for nothing: that time-domain optimization of the digital transmission chain allows for there to be aliased energy in the reconstructed signal.

?

 

The problem is that this is a misdescription and one which could and should have been corrected from the outset. At most (and only arguably) it optimises one sort of time domain behaviour at the expense of others. Only in the case of synthetic pulses could it possibly represent a pareto improvement. In other cases its reconstruction will be inaccurate in the time domain. This has to be the case.

This is not just a careless use of language. When stated accurately the slogan  evaporates. Making the accurate statement would be good journalism but poor advertorial. You have a choice.

.

[Brinkman Ship]

I found this very interesting...

https://www.stereophile.com/content/sonic-frontiers-sfd-2-da-processor-ja-hdcd

[Rt66indierock]

From Reinet Investments S.C.A. Annual Report at March 31, 2018

 

They are the controlling shareholder's of MQA Ltd.

 

Other investments are carried at their estimated fair value of € 59 million at 31 March 2018 (31 March 2017: € 64 million). The decrease in the estimated fair value of other investments relates mostly to capital repayments and the decrease in estimated fair value of the investment in a digital music industry initiative to € 10 million at 31 March 2018 (31 March 2017: € 15 million), reflecting start-up costs and intellectual property development expenditure.

 

At 31 March 2016 the investment was valued at € 25 million. It will be interesting to see how MQA Ltd is valued at 31 March 2019 by Reinet.

[lucretius]

1 hour ago, Rt66indierock said:

At 31 March 2016 the investment was valued at € 25 million. It will be interesting to see how MQA Ltd is valued at 31 March 2019 by Reinet.

 

I guess it won't hit zero until the contracts expire.

[FredericV]

We were exhibitor at the X-FI premium show in The Netherlands. So no time to visit other rooms, but as always, google is your friend for show feedback the week after.

So what happened?

This year, nobody even mentioned MQA, and nobody played MQA.

https://www.alpha-audio.nl/2018/09/verslag-xfi-audio-show-2018/#comment-37952

 

And this is not due the lack of rooms, this year the show got so big most visitors complained they could not visit all the rooms in one day. The enormous NH Koningshof abbey style conference center was fully booked during the X-FI show. They only had one room left the day just before the show which was used as storage, which was booked as a demo room on friday just for the show, so fully booked & completely sold out! I can know as I requested one additional room the day before the show, and the organizers told me it was their last room. We were not in this last room, but helped someone on the show to find a last minute room due to some change in used speaker brand for our own demo.

This show attracts audiophiles from Belgium, The Netherlands and Germany.

 

Our Brussels show is nothing compared to this (much smaller show in the Brussels Marriot hotel), so if a show this large does not have any MQA demo .... and MQA claims to have 100 partners in their latest report, something must be ........

X-FI hosts hundreds of brands. Regular speakers like Hans Beekhuyzen (member evangelist on CA) no longer focused on MQA, but gave a totally different talk. There were no MQA talks this year.

[FredericV]

Very interesting reactions to a public post by Doug Schneider. It basically proves LeeS is affiliated with the MQA team in some way.

Those speaking about MQA team, now expressing they know several team members, and that the loss made in 2017 is not accurate.

 

 

[kumakuma]

14 minutes ago, FredericV said:

Very interesting reactions to a public post by Doug Schneider. It basically proves LeeS is affiliated with the MQA team in some way.

Those speaking about MQA team, now expressing they know several team members, and that the loss made in 2017 is not accurate.

 

Lee is a complete idiot.

 

The idea that a company in MQA's position would under report or hold back revenue from their audited financials makes zero sense.

 

If anything, they would be trying to reduce their reported loss by whatever means possible.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Wish I could under report revenue to the IRS :~)

[rickca]

1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Wish I could under report revenue to the IRS :~)

So do Michael Cohen and Paul Manafort.

[Rt66indierock]

49 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

Lee is a complete idiot.

 

The idea that a company in MQA's position would under report or hold back revenue from their audited financials makes zero sense.

 

If anything, they would be trying to reduce their reported loss by whatever means possible.

 

The Board of Directors approved the financials and no accounting firm the size of BDO LLP is going cheat for a fee of less than 15,000 Pounds.

 

In any case if you hold back revenue you are presenting a worse case to the outside world.

[Brinkman Ship]

New "MQA Partners" announced..and new companies added to my Do Not Buy List:

 

DALI

 

A&K

 

Krell

 

EMM Labs

 

Audiolab

[Brinkman Ship]

The charlatan Alan Taffel states the following in his Golden Shower Award for dCS-

:

"dCS Rossini DAC/Player with Roon and MQA

When originally introduced in 2015, the Rossini was an immediate hit. Though far from cheap, it nailed features and sound for the money. When you listen to the Rossini, all you hear is beautifully fleshed-out music. The player even manages to elicit from CDs much of what usually distinguishes SACDs. As for value, the Rossini easily vanquishes its little brother, the Debussy, and comes close to the performance of dCS’ Vivaldi flagship.

The Rossini’s sound and value make for a compelling story; but even more striking is the Rossini’s ability to morph as time and new technology demand. With a simple downloaded update, it instantly incorporates two of the most important recent developments in digital audio: MQA and Roon. Between them, they catapult this unit into a new class of sonics and operability.

The Rossini started life as a truly exceptional component. Now, it is even more so."

 

http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/2018-golden-ear-awards-alan-taffel/

 

Yes, MQA is one of the most IMPORTANT RECENT DEVELOPMENTS in digital audio..right up there with Roon...

[labjr]

When a $30K dac with an optional $7500 clock is a good value, publications have become a joke.

[Shadders]

16 hours ago, Brinkman Ship said:

New "MQA Partners" announced..and new companies added to my Do Not Buy List:

 

DALI

 

A&K

 

Krell

 

EMM Labs

 

Audiolab

Hi,

OK - if MQA claims are false - such as reversal of dispersion, and other technical firsts, why has no one approached the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) to present prove of the MQA false claims ?

 

If MQA is a false system, then evidence presented to the ASA will initiate an investigation.

 

Why has no one challenged the AES presenting evidence that MQA claims are false, such they remove the paper from their archives ?

 

Regards,

Shadders.

[Brinkman Ship]

2 hours ago, Shadders said:

Hi,

OK - if MQA claims are false - such as reversal of dispersion, and other technical firsts, why has no one approached the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) to present prove of the MQA false claims ?

 

If MQA is a false system, then evidence presented to the ASA will initiate an investigation.

 

Why has no one challenged the AES presenting evidence that MQA claims are false, such they remove the paper from their archives ?

 

Regards,

Shadders.

On the list of false claims..how high do you think MQA is as a priority?? As despicable as is MQA is..no one's safety is at risk.

[Brinkman Ship]

2 hours ago, labjr said:

When a $30K dac with an optional $7500 clock is a good value, publications have become a joke.

"have become"....?

[Shadders]

4 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

On the list of false claims..how high do you think MQA is as a priority?? As despicable as is MQA is..no one's safety is at risk.

Hi,

The ASA has taken hifi sellers to task and their claims have been retracted. ASA is about advertising, not safety.

 

The AES is not a professional body if it allows false claims to be presented, and unchallenged. Such claims would never be unscrutinised by the IEEE or IET, and MQA would certainly receive severe criticism on a technical basis.

 

Again, i cannot see why the professional community has not exposed MQA for what it is.

 

Regards,

Shadders,

[Brinkman Ship]

3 minutes ago, Shadders said:

Hi,

The ASA has taken hifi sellers to task and their claims have been retracted. ASA is about advertising, not safety.

 

The AES is not a professional body if it allows false claims to be presented, and unchallenged. Such claims would never be unscrutinised by the IEEE or IET, and MQA would certainly receive severe criticism on a technical basis.

 

Again, i cannot see why the professional community has not exposed MQA for what it is.

 

Regards,

Shadders,

..because they really don't care...

[mansr]

2 hours ago, Shadders said:

OK - if MQA claims are false - such as reversal of dispersion, and other technical firsts, why has no one approached the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) to present prove of the MQA false claims ?

There's not much the ASA could do. Most of the MQA marketing is done not through regular advertising, but by means of shill pieces in the audio press. For better or worse, publishing incorrect information in a magazine is legal. Proving the existence of collusion and intent to defraud consumers is no easy task.

 

2 hours ago, Shadders said:

Why has no one challenged the AES presenting evidence that MQA claims are false, such they remove the paper from their archives ?

Does anyone take the AES seriously?

[Shadorne]

On 10/4/2018 at 7:21 PM, Brinkman Ship said:

New "MQA Partners" announced..and new companies added to my Do Not Buy List:

 

DALI

 

A&K

 

Krell

 

EMM Labs

 

Audiolab

 

I was seriously looking at one of these manufacturers listed above. Contemplating a very large expenditure and having already ruled out DCS for their MQA support. Not anymore. I have dropped my interest entirely. It is impossible to have respect for any “audiophile” manufacturer that deliberately adds technology that is detrimental to sound quality - materially and audibly  decreasing fidelity. Either they are totally incompetent or they are dominated by marketing (looking for any excuse to boost sales of newer products no matter how dubious) rather than serious quality engineering. Both are unacceptable faults to someone looking for high fidelity in audio reproduction.

 

I think I will take a look at Chord. The Hugo M-Scaler looks crazy overkill for just a brick wall imaging filter but I can’t find fault with the engineering logic. Only their claims seem too exaggerated. Hard to justify why that level of precision is necessary - 1 Million tap filter - obviously the manufacturer claims it is -  is there a good critical thinking thread here about Hugo M-Scaler? I wonder what latency it introduces. Anyone try it with Roon? And why wouldn’t HQ Player or other computer based filtering be a simpler more flexible solution? Obviously I have questions that are off topic here. So please direct me to the right place.

 

 

[Brinkman Ship]

1 hour ago, Shadorne said:

 

I was seriously looking at one of these manufacturers listed above. Contemplating a very large expenditure and having already ruled out DCS for their MQA support. Not anymore. I have dropped my interest entirely. It is impossible to have respect for any “audiophile” manufacturer that deliberately adds technology that is detrimental to sound quality - materially and audibly  decreasing fidelity. Either they are totally incompetent or they are dominated by marketing (looking for any excuse to boost sales of newer products no matter how dubious) rather than serious quality engineering. Both are unacceptable faults to someone looking for high fidelity in audio reproduction.

 

I think I will take a look at Chord. The Hugo M-Scaler looks crazy overkill for just a brick wall imaging filter but I can’t find fault with the engineering logic. Only their claims seem too exaggerated. Hard to justify why that level of precision is necessary - 1 Million tap filter - obviously the manufacturer claims it is -  is there a good critical thinking thread here about Hugo M-Scaler? I wonder what latency it introduces. Anyone try it with Roon? And why wouldn’t HQ Player or other computer based filtering be a simpler more flexible solution? Obviously I have questions that are off topic here. So please direct me to the right place.

 

 

Needless to day, I agree with your stance 1000%.

 

Companies who embraced MQA need to be punished..by consumers voting with their dollars..it is a real power we have.

 

The Chord DACs indeed sound really good. Their prices raise eyebrows, but sonically they are beyond reproach..and yes their technical claims are overkill.

[Hugo9000]

I was perusing a thread on MQA at WBF, and someone quoted JA:

 

"My analyses comparing the spectrum of the original WAV file with that of the decoded MQA version did indeed prove that MQA's "music origami" worked, the spectra of the original WAV file and the decoded MQA version overlaying one another exactly up to the 44.1kHz Nyquist frequency of the original recording."
Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/content/listening-mqa#5hxkIqAyG5X5BgVH.99

 

In the article, JA goes into a bit more regarding the "origami," and concludes:

"Case proved for the music origami aspect of MQA, I feel. However, the only way of testing the second claim—of MQA's correction of time-domain errors—is through listening."

 

Here is my question:  If the spectra of the original WAV file overlay exactly with the decoded MQA version up to the 44.1kHz Nyquist frequency of the original recording, then how is it possible for there to be any correction of time-domain errors?  If the overlays are exact, then if there were time-domain errors in the original, wouldn't they have to be present in the decoded MQA version as well?  Use of the word exactly doesn't leave any wiggle room.  How would a listening test show time-domain errors when his spectral analyses showed an exact overlay up to 44.1kHz.  And another question:  How can he posit that the only way of testing MQA'a claim of correction of time-domain errors is through listening?  His "I feel" was a qualifier for his statement about proving the case for the music "origami."

 

Anywho.  This has probably been discussed already, but I don't recall coming across these points before.
 

[Brinkman Ship]

5 minutes ago, Hugo9000 said:

I was perusing a thread on MQA at WBF, and someone quoted JA:

 

"My analyses comparing the spectrum of the original WAV file with that of the decoded MQA version did indeed prove that MQA's "music origami" worked, the spectra of the original WAV file and the decoded MQA version overlaying one another exactly up to the 44.1kHz Nyquist frequency of the original recording."
Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/content/listening-mqa#5hxkIqAyG5X5BgVH.99

 

In the article, JA goes into a bit more regarding the "origami," and concludes:

"Case proved for the music origami aspect of MQA, I feel. However, the only way of testing the second claim—of MQA's correction of time-domain errors—is through listening."

 

Here is my question:  If the spectra of the original WAV file overlay exactly with the decoded MQA version up to the 44.1kHz Nyquist frequency of the original recording, then how is it possible for there to be any correction of time-domain errors?  If the overlays are exact, then if there were time-domain errors in the original, wouldn't they have to be present in the decoded MQA version as well?  Use of the word exactly doesn't leave any wiggle room.  How would a listening test show time-domain errors when his spectral analyses showed an exact overlay up to 44.1kHz.  And another question:  How can he posit that the only way of testing MQA'a claim of correction of time-domain errors is through listening?  His "I feel" was a qualifier for his statement about proving the case for the music "origami."

 

Anywho.  This has probably been discussed already, but I don't recall coming across these points before.
 

Archie and Paul Miller proved there is aliasing and artifacts. Poor JA simply did not have the chops to do proper measurements and he was shown up. Not much more to say about it.

 

The only other explanation is that he had no intention of doing proper measurements in order to show MQA as a viable technology.

 

A truly humiliating episode in Stereophile's history.