MQA is Vaporware

[Tintinabulum]

31 minutes ago, Paul R said:

 

Yep - have to rush right out there and correct every opinion you think is wrong - on the internet? 

 

God Bless your little heart.... (grin) 

 

 

A journey of a thousand miles...

[Ralf11]

someone seems intent on deflecting this thread....

[Don Hills]

I thought the OP said some time ago it was time to close this thread and start a new one?

[firedog]

10 hours ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

Historically speaking, true high resolution has meant 24/88.2 or higher.

Historically speaking, there's never actually been an agreement on what it means. 

I could just as truthfully claim that historically speaking, 24/48 is the threshold.

Today, 24/44.1 seems to be accepted, and I don't think I actually have an argument with that.

[Don Hills]

1 hour ago, Paul R said:

... But there is always the chance you young people might have some new take on an old issue.

 

That's often how progress is made.

[mansr]

8 hours ago, Lee Scoggins said:

Don't confuse audible range with sampling rate.  The latter has to do with resolution and that impacts the 20-20khz audible range.

You really need to brush up on your maths.

[mansr]

6 hours ago, Paul R said:

I have been looking into the "lossy" part of MQA a bit over the past few days, just to satisfy my own curiosity. Disregarding any suspicions of MQA being a DRM attempt, I found a couple instances where people claimed that the hardware  reconstruction after unfolding in software actually completely restored a 24/96K recording. I have not been able to verify that as true, but has anyone else?

MQA tries to preserve as much as possible up to 24/96. However, it is mathematically impossible for it to be lossless in all cases, not even if limited to 16-bit precision. With many typical recordings, it is probably possible for it to get quite close to 16/96. That's after the first "core" decoding, which is available in some software players. The hardware-only "rendering" stage actually makes things worse again.

[Hifi Bob]

13 hours ago, Paul R said:

My personal opinion is that technically, the best sounding recordings of the past few years came from 24/192K recordings. Such as the title from Soundkeeper Recordings below. If it were only available in MQA, I would buy it without any hesitation at all. 

That seems like saying if only this CD were available in MP3, I would buy it without any hesitation at all.

 

Sure, unlike MP3, you can’t do the exact MQA encode yourself, but load it into a DAW and you can perform all manner of lossy processing to your heart’s desire!

[Paul R]

3 hours ago, Hifi Bob said:

That seems like saying if only this CD were available in MP3, I would buy it without any hesitation at all.

 

Sure, unlike MP3, you can’t do the exact MQA encode yourself, but load it into a DAW and you can perform all manner of lossy processing to your heart’s desire!

 

Poor wording on my part - of course what I meant was what I said,  but another, perhaps better way of saying that is this.  

 

If the music had been published in no other form save for MQA, I would still purchase it. The music is that good in my opinion. 

 

-Paul

[MikeyFresh]

9 hours ago, Paul R said:

Like I said, you are not putting out anything new.

 

But you have with a vague reference to supposedly having heard of a "couple instances where people claimed" complete 24/96 restoration?

 

Of course if one has the correct software and hardware implementation only. Otherwise it's FOMO, and that's the intended takeaway I suppose, rush out and buy a Mytek or Pro-Ject or iFi DAC so that you can hear this wonderful 24/96 complete reconstruction for yourself, complete with the added bonus of that all-elusive time domain correction.

[Shadders]

3 minutes ago, Paul R said:

If the music had been published in no other form save for MQA, I would still purchase it

Hi,

I propose that this statement is assigned the medal for stating the bleeding obvious.

 

People converting to other formats aside, if the only format was MQA, then people would have to use the format to listen to music.

 

MQA is just an attempt to implement a Dolby/DTS control/hierarchy on the music listening public. Luckily, there are open formats that everyone can use - MQA will fail.

 

Only the greed of the record labels will make MQA become more prevalent.

 

Regards,

Shadders.

[Rt66indierock]

8 hours ago, Don Hills said:

I thought the OP said some time ago it was time to close this thread and start a new one?

 

I had a serious infection and my father recently passed away sorry for the delay in summing up the  OP.  

[Paul R]

4 hours ago, mansr said:

MQA tries to preserve as much as possible up to 24/96. However, it is mathematically impossible for it to be lossless in all cases, not even if limited to 16-bit precision. With many typical recordings, it is probably possible for it to get quite close to 16/96. That's after the first "core" decoding, which is available in some software players. The hardware-only "rendering" stage actually makes things worse again.

 

That makes sense, I think. The issue, of course, seems to be with filters?  

 

The iFi iDSD Micro and my old Meridian-2 are quite different with the same MQA files. I mean the output is audibly and measurably different, more so than I would expect. I expected the difference in MQA files between different DACs to be less than the difference between PCM files, but it is actually greater, I think. Is that in accord with what other folks are seeing?

 

 

 

 

[Paul R]

1 hour ago, Shadders said:

Hi,

I propose that this statement is assigned the medal for stating the bleeding obvious.

 

People converting to other formats aside, if the only format was MQA, then people would have to use the format to listen to music...

 

Well I thought it was pretty obvious, but it did have to be explained for some reason. 

 

That MQA will never be the only digital format is just as obvious I would think.  Regardless of how much it is or is not accepted by the labels.

 

Tidal was MQA’s  great hope for dominance, and that is not working out all that well for them. The auto industry is their next hope, same as it was for sat radio.

 

We do live in interesting times.

[Lee Scoggins]

10 minutes ago, Paul R said:

 

Well I thought it was pretty obvious, but it did have to be explained for some reason. 

 

That MQA will never be the only digital format is just as obvious I would think.  Regardless of how much it is or is not accepted by the labels.

 

Tidal was MQA’s  great hope for dominance, and that is not working out all that well for them. The auto industry is their next hope, same as it was for sat radio.

 

We do live in interesting times.

 

In my opinion, the streaming services are the best hope for MQA due to the volume of customers and how royalties can be arranged.  If MQA catches hold with one of those then adoption would become wider and likely create a more viable business.

[mansr]

3 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

In my opinion, the streaming services are the best hope for MQA due to the volume of customers and how royalties can be arranged.  If MQA catches hold with one of those then adoption would become wider and likely create a more viable business.

You say that as if it were a good thing.

[Lee Scoggins]

8 minutes ago, mansr said:

You say that as if it were a good thing.

 

For those of us who like the sound improvement, it is a good thing!

[crenca]

@Rt66indierock, you should ask @The Computer Audiophilefor moderation.  

[christopher3393]

On 2/19/2019 at 11:30 AM, KeenObserver said:

Is MQA dead yet?

Or are they still pushing it?

 

On 1/7/2019 at 12:11 PM, KeenObserver said:

Is MQA dead yet?

 

On 12/6/2018 at 6:14 PM, KeenObserver said:

Apparently, MQA is not dead yet.  The shills are still trying to poke it with a stick.

How horrible a proposition is MQA that the shills have to push it in  every forum?

1

 

On 12/5/2018 at 4:07 PM, KeenObserver said:

Is MQA dead yet?

I'd like to take off my muck boots.

 

 

On 11/30/2018 at 4:47 PM, KeenObserver said:

Is MQA dead yet?

 

On 1/28/2019 at 3:58 PM, KeenObserver said:

I'll be glad when MQA is dead and buried and we don't have to listen to the shills anymore.

 

 

 About that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven. We see as if through a glass darkly. We may indeed be at the very Brink! And yet....what's in an acronym, like MQA? Acronyms much like pseudonyms come and go. Yet no sooner does one depart than another rises up to replace it. All is vanity, Your Keenness.

[Rt66indierock]

28 minutes ago, crenca said:

@Rt66indierock, you should ask @The Computer Audiophilefor moderation.  

 

Why? Lee may about to say something he will regret for a long time same as JVS and Steven Stone have. 

 

He has a long way to go to top asking how I knew Meridian's financial statements were consolidated (its on the cover page) but I believe he can do it.

[Jud]

1 hour ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

For those of us who like the sound improvement, it is a good thing!

 

Lee, you have a history (well OK, one example - LHL crowdfunding) of being oblivious to the dangers others point out in the financial machinations of the audio and music industry.  The danger here is the potential to rather easily cut off the supply of non-MQA RedBook and hi res for those of us who prefer it.

[MikeyFresh]

12 hours ago, Paul R said:

But there is always the chance you young people might have some new take on an old issue.

 

I don't know why you'd presume to know anyone's particular age, but I am not young.

[new_media]

11 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

Lee, you have a history (well OK, one example - LHL crowdfunding) of being oblivious to the dangers others point out in the financial machinations of the audio and music industry.  The danger here is the potential to rather easily cut off the supply of non-MQA RedBook and hi res for those of us who prefer it.

 

I still mostly buy the music that I like, either CD or hi-res downloads, but MQA exclusivity would be the nail in the coffin for me. I would just switch to streaming if the titles I wanted were only available in MQA. Perhaps that's what the music labels want, but I'm already paying for Tidal AND buying CDs and downloads.

[new_media]

2 minutes ago, MikeyFresh said:

 

I don't know why you'd presume to know anyone's particular age, but I am not young.

 

Probably because you're "fresh...?"

[crenca]

34 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Why? Lee may about to say something he will regret for a long time same as JVS and Steven Stone have. 

 

He has a long way to go to top asking how I knew Meridian's financial statements were consolidated (its on the cover page) but I believe he can do it.

 

Good point.  I was thinking more of the likes Paul R, whose wordy prose only points to his own ignorance about MQA and unwillingness to research the basics before he opines...