Ralf11 Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 MQA is trying hard to do so, and I prefer to NOT downplay such attempts. Link to comment
Paul R Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 15 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said: Sometimes metaphors do not work. IMHO, "barbarians" is not a good moniker for MQA shills. I had to think about that. To me they resemble the Vandals and Goths, so I would still go with barbarians, or at least, barbaric behavior. -Paul Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC. Robert A. Heinlein Link to comment
sandyk Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 19 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said: Sounds like we have a volunteer 😄 You need a group of USA members, of which there are far more than from other countries. How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file. PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020 Link to comment
Jud Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 1 hour ago, mansr said: It's always valid to examine someone's motivations. "Examine," eh? Seemed more like rampant speculation or mere insult to me, but opinions differ I suppose. 1 hour ago, mansr said: This is why author affiliations are disclosed in scientific publications. Yes, I often see authors of scientific papers described as "stooges," with pictures of gorillas.🙄 I mean this is Lee Scoggins. Who cares what he thinks? He's managed to destroy his own credibility about any number of issues, including MQA, in no time here. Pete Townshend knew what he was talking about when he wrote that line in Tommy: "Let's forget you, better still." One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature. Link to comment
Popular Post mansr Posted February 28, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 28, 2019 1 hour ago, crenca said: When it comes to audio, which is just consumer electronics, the estimates vary just what the signal to noise ratio is. Some believe as high as 40% of all "reviews" are pure propaganda. I think it's closer to 98%, possibly as much 104%. The Computer Audiophile, crenca, Jud and 1 other 2 2 Link to comment
crenca Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 9 minutes ago, Jud said: "Examine," eh? Seemed more like rampant speculation or mere insult to me, but opinions differ I suppose. Yes, I often see authors of scientific papers described as "stooges," with pictures of gorillas.🙄 I mean this is Lee Scoggins. Who cares what he thinks? He's managed to destroy his own credibility about any number of issues, including MQA, in no time here. Pete Townshend knew what he was talking about when he wrote that line in Tommy: "Let's forget you, better still." Yep, they differ. Also, just so you know this is a stooge: and these are guerilla...marketers...in love: Jud 1 Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math! Link to comment
Jud Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 Just now, mansr said: I think it's closer to 98%, possibly as much 104%. At some point in the now distant past, I found myself parsing yet another review full of nearly uniform praise for some sign of what the reviewer's real opinion was, and thought, "Why go to the trouble?" The Computer Audiophile 1 One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature. Link to comment
Jud Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 3 minutes ago, crenca said: Yep, they differ. Also, just so you know this is a stooge: and these are guerilla...marketers...in love: Any post with Curly, I like. crenca 1 One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature. Link to comment
mansr Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 39 minutes ago, Paul R said: Still, every time corporate culture has tried to put a lock on the wild and woolly internet culture, corporate interests have lost big time. I don't bother locking my door any more. The last burglar couldn't get in, so the lock seems unnecessary. Hugo9000 1 Link to comment
Popular Post Ralf11 Posted February 28, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 28, 2019 While Scoggs has "managed to destroy his own credibility about any number of issues, including MQA, in no time here," new people who have only recently joined could easily be taken in by his duplicitous posts. Kyhl, Shadders and MikeyFresh 2 1 Link to comment
Popular Post KeenObserver Posted February 28, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 28, 2019 I went up to the mountain to take care of business and do some winter maintenance. I come back and it seems the MQA BS floodgates have opened once again. This brings me back to a point I made before. Look at all the rhetoric from the MQA shills and apologists. Look at the video from RMAF. Look at the behavior of the CEO of MQA. Are these the people that you want controlling the future of music distribution? Every music loving consumer needs to shun MQA like the plague! MikeyFresh, mcgillroy and r0dd3r5 1 2 Boycott Warner Boycott Tidal Boycott Roon Boycott Lenbrook Link to comment
Popular Post The Computer Audiophile Posted February 28, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 28, 2019 2 hours ago, crenca said: When it comes to audio, which is just consumer electronics, the estimates vary just what the signal to noise ratio is. Some believe as high as 40% of all "reviews" are pure propaganda. I am not sure it is that high, but I do believe the culture of auidophiledom forces a "read between the lines" style upon almost all reviewers. As far as the forums, it depends. Some of them are little more than industry advertisements. This one is pretty good. Lee has found a way to keep the noise up against the signal, but any/all rule/moderation schemes have the strengths and weaknesses. I think your 40% estimate is low. The whole read between the lines thing is so foolish, but it’s so pervasive in this industry. I think light moderation is key when providing enough rope for some to hang themselves. Fools prove their foolishness all the time. Paul R, crenca and Jud 1 2 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
KeenObserver Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 "You actions certainly suggest you and a few others here definitely have an agenda. I wish you well, but doing bad things like you are doing will inevitably lead to unpleasant consequences. That isn't a threat by the way, just a prediction. Have a nice life. " That is a quote from someone that is telling MQA critics to be civil. What the MQA shills mean is that those people that are closely examining MQA should shut up, bend over, and accept MQA. Ralf11 1 Boycott Warner Boycott Tidal Boycott Roon Boycott Lenbrook Link to comment
Popular Post KeenObserver Posted February 28, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 28, 2019 What the MQA shills would like is for the MQA critics to be silenced so that the shills could spew their propaganda uninterrupted. MikeyFresh and Ralf11 1 1 Boycott Warner Boycott Tidal Boycott Roon Boycott Lenbrook Link to comment
Paul R Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 1 hour ago, mansr said: I don't bother locking my door any more. The last burglar couldn't get in, so the lock seems unnecessary. LOL! I just live in a place where one has no real need to lock one's door. Besides, I do not think there are any locks that can keep a burglar out. -Paul Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC. Robert A. Heinlein Link to comment
Popular Post KeenObserver Posted February 28, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 28, 2019 To say that it is unlikely that MQA would take control of the music chain is a misdirection. That is exactly what MQA would like to see happen. Read the MQA financial statements. Read the directors comments. MQA has suffered substantial financial losses. In order to recoup, they would have to drain substantial money from the consumer. Ralf11 and MikeyFresh 1 1 Boycott Warner Boycott Tidal Boycott Roon Boycott Lenbrook Link to comment
Popular Post Paul R Posted February 28, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 28, 2019 2 hours ago, Ralf11 said: MQA is trying hard to do so, and I prefer to NOT downplay such attempts. I just want to point out, most audiophiles don't need saving, from anyone or anything. And the vast majority of audiophiles do not feel strongly about MQA at all. Any more than they do about Dolby. If you have made it your mission to convince them otherwise, I suspect you will make much more headway with civility, calm reasoning, and allowing people to disagree with you. You certainly are not going to frighten most audiophiles into thinking all their music will be locked up by MQA. And a sizable chunk of those audiophiles probably would not care anyway. Let's see what MQA can do with their LPs and millions upon millions of existing AIFF (or other lossless) files. Get MQA in all DACs? I guarantee some enterprising audio guy will just design a DAC without MQA. (Miska already did, as have other CA folks.) These really are "first world" problems. Nothing that a company can do that someone will not find their way around, over, under, or, by application of sufficient ingenuity, straight thru. Nothing they can do that is going to make you go bankrupt or get jailed. mansr, ARQuint, sandyk and 2 others 3 2 Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC. Robert A. Heinlein Link to comment
rickca Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 Is there a race between @Ralf11 and @Paul R for the most prolific poster award? I always do a year-end MVP award thread for AS contributors, but hey ... we could open up a new category. 🙄 Ralf11 1 Pareto Audio AMD 7700 Server --> Berkeley Alpha USB --> Jeff Rowland Aeris --> Jeff Rowland 625 S2 --> Focal Utopia 3 Diablos with 2 x Focal Electra SW 1000 BE subs i7-6700K/Windows 10 --> EVGA Nu Audio Card --> Focal CMS50's Link to comment
Paul R Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 36 minutes ago, rickca said: Is there a race between @Ralf11 and @Paul R for the most prolific poster award? I always do a year-end MVP award thread for AS contributors, but hey ... we could open up a new category. 🙄 Howdy? Where were you in 2010 or so? Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC. Robert A. Heinlein Link to comment
firedog Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 4 hours ago, Paul R said: Howdy? Where were you in 2010 or so? Unlike Paul, I didn't go away and I post daily - and I'm still not close to his number of posts😁! Main listening (small home office): Main setup: Surge protector +>Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Strip/Isolation>QuietPC Low Noise Server>Roon (Audiolense DRC)>Stack Audio Link II>Kii Control>Kii Three (on their own electric circuit) >GIK Room Treatments. Secondary Path: Server with Audiolense RC>RPi4 or analog>Cayin iDAC6 MKII (tube mode) (XLR)>Kii Three . Bedroom: SBTouch to Cambridge Soundworks Desktop Setup. Living Room/Kitchen: Ropieee (RPi3b+ with touchscreen) + Schiit Modi3E to a pair of Morel Hogtalare. All absolute statements about audio are false Link to comment
Popular Post Shadders Posted February 28, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 28, 2019 10 hours ago, Paul R said: Should the worst happen, my money would be on a vast new peer to peer file sharing network, but one designed from the get go to frustrate the record labels and make it near impossible to track down who did what. Distributed on a vast scale and impossible to shut down. That would truly be the labels worst fear I think. Hi, If you examine Kim Dot Com and Megaupload - this business was closed down and the person responsible was prosecuted. Any such system such as a peer to peer file sharing will be disrupted at least, by the authorities. If you look at streaming - i do not see the artists getting a lot of money per stream or track played. Was it not the case that the artists complained about not getting the revenue they perceived that they should receive. Also, see : https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/26/how-spotify-apple-music-can-pay-musicians-more-commentary.html Only the very big artists get a significant revenue, and payments to the artist per stream is exceedingly low at $0.006 to $0.0084 per stream to the holder of music rights. So the artist gets a cut of this. So, unless streaming raises their prices significantly (Spotify, for example, is still losing money, despite growing 40 percent a year.) then the streaming and artists are still not making much money. Why the record labels sell the catalogue so cheaply is unknown - if Spotify cannot make money at the current costs, then the labels are not really making money from streaming. Unless the costs increase significantly - which would kill the streaming business model ? In regards to MQA - the major labels are all shareholders. There are patents owned by MQA Ltd and Meridian (just under 50% owned by Reinet Investments) which could be used to restrict MQA files to specific devices (streaming, downloads) Streaming seems to be killing the purchase of CD's. Which means that if streaming/downloads are the main music playback source, then the patents could restrict the number of devices people could playback music on. Such control means that one file can only be played on one device. If you want to play the song on another device you need to purchase the song again. In the UK, the law was changed to allow you to rip CD's etc., for your own purposes - to play on portable music players as an example. The Music Union campaigned and had the law overturned. So, the point is, streaming means that the labels/artists get less revenue, MQA offers a DRM technology to allow strict control by the record labels, and any large scale alternative method to subvert this would be met with legal action and the closure of such a method. Streaming may be cheap now, but when such a mechanism is in place (MQA DRM), then i expect the price to increase significantly as total control will be possible. Maybe everyone is shooting themselves in the foot by subscribing to streaming, at such a low cost. I do not see the record labels losing money so graciously - once MQA is embedded in most devices, they can switch on DRM. Maybe this will create a renaissance for CD's as per LP's ? Regards, Shadders. Paul R, Teresa and MikeyFresh 3 Link to comment
Shadders Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 Hi, Bad news - MQA claims on their website are allowed - complaint not upheld : https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/mqa-ltd-a18-470395.html An excerpt : "MQA provided a peer-reviewed publication which they said explained the approach taken by MQA, as well as an article by the Recording Industry Association of America, whose technical committee investigated the technology and approved it for the release of recordings described as high resolution. They said that the technology had been adopted into guidelines from Recording Academy for high resolution music production and provided a link to the guidelines on the Grammy website. They said major music labels had adopted the technology and provided statements from eight people they said were respected, such as music producers, engineers and recording artists." What was the peer reviewed publications (AES ??). Major record labels adopting the techniology - do the ASA know that they are shareholders ??, so a conflict of interest. Who are the respected people ?? - did they contact Brian Lucey ?? Utter farce. Regards, Shadders. MikeyFresh 1 Link to comment
mansr Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 9 minutes ago, Shadders said: Hi, Bad news - MQA claims on their website are allowed - complaint not upheld : https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/mqa-ltd-a18-470395.html An excerpt : "MQA provided a peer-reviewed publication which they said explained the approach taken by MQA, as well as an article by the Recording Industry Association of America, whose technical committee investigated the technology and approved it for the release of recordings described as high resolution. They said that the technology had been adopted into guidelines from Recording Academy for high resolution music production and provided a link to the guidelines on the Grammy website. They said major music labels had adopted the technology and provided statements from eight people they said were respected, such as music producers, engineers and recording artists." What was the peer reviewed publications (AES ??). Major record labels adopting the techniology - do the ASA know that they are shareholders ??, so a conflict of interest. Who are the respected people ?? - did they contact Brian Lucey ?? Utter farce. Regards, Shadders. Told you it wouldn't work. Far too technical for the ASA. Their statement basically boils down to "we have no idea what we're looking at, but the guys selling it say it's good, so we're going to go with that." Link to comment
Popular Post mansr Posted February 28, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 28, 2019 With things like this it's generally better not to file a complaint. The odds are greatly in their favour, and when they win, they'll be able to point to it as "proof" of their honesty. Paul R and crenca 2 Link to comment
Shadders Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 1 minute ago, mansr said: Told you it wouldn't work. Far too technical for the ASA. Their statement basically boils down to "we have no idea what we're looking at, but the guys selling it say it's good, so we're going to go with that." Hi, Not sure who made the complaint - but i would expect them to present evidence to the contrary, or the conflict of interest. Regards, Shadders. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now