Jump to content
Rt66indierock

MQA is Vaporware

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, manisandher said:

 

That's great. Thanks Paul.

 

So, it seems I didn't do too bad a job at aligning the files manually:

Deltawave_Mani.thumb.jpg.4cf3cf2516d9113f8594d41d959ea8de.jpg

 

The Delta Phase plot looks interesting:

385769890_DeltaPhase.JPG.344f9a6114d0e4e2d0dd2e6f5bb63a7f.JPG

 

Anyone have any thoughts about this?

 

Mani.

 

Been through some kind of minimum phase filter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mcgillroy said:

Not sure if this was discussed here already but a new patent application by Peter Craven and Bob Stuart was published late February:

 

DIGITAL ENCAPSULATION OF AUDIO SIGNALS - http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2019/0057709.html

 

See also here: https://www.gearslutz.com/board/showpost.php?p=13859201&postcount=541

From a brief look, that looks like a description of the "rendering" filters used in MQA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

No.  That would be difficult to get evidence for since it is a change in behavior in the future.  But the label people I have spoken to recognize that paying the artists more is required for the system to be healthy.

 

Thank God I left my hip boots on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

But the label people I have spoken to recognize that paying the artists more is required for the system to be healthy.

 

Healthy being less profitable than unhealthy it's a reasonable assumption they're content to stick with the latter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe he meant toilet paper


"The overwhelming majority [of audiophiles] have very little knowledge, if any, about the most basic principles and operating characteristics of audio equipment. They often base their purchasing decisions on hearsay, and the preaching of media sages. Unfortunately, because of commercial considerations, much information is rooted in increasing revenue, not in assisting the audiophile. It seems as if the only requirements for becoming an "authority" in the world of audio is a keyboard."

-- Bruce Rozenblit of Transcendent Sound

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Miska said:

Been through some kind of minimum phase filter?

 

OK, if so, nothing that we couldn't do ourselves during playback.

 

Whatever's causing what's seen on the delta-phase plot, its affect seems to be audible - to my ears, the MQA sounds different to the hires. Actually, everyone who took the blind test reported hearing differences, and the descriptions were pretty consistent.

 

I think those who consider MQA a simple compression scheme are mistaken. It seems to be doing more...

 

Mani.


Phasure Mach III audio PC -> HQPlayer/XXHighEnd @24/705.6 -> Phasure NOS1 DAC -> First Watt F5-cloned mono amps -> Tune Audio Anima horn speakers

 

Mani Sandher

from-first-principles.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Was thinking of something similar myself. A thread people can digest if they just want to see MQA for what it is. 

 

If by "what it is" you mean a technical explanation along the lines of the two posts above (and Jud's - Jud's actually uses more understandable layman language) I think that would be helpful - the 4 posts could serve as the OP.  A non "debating" thread where only technical explanations by qualified individuals are posted, perhaps actual tech questions allowed by non astroturfers.  

 

I was actually thinking of something more, a thread where we discuss "what now"  - what, if anything, can consumers do now given the technical stuff is at a mature point.


Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Paul R said:

Just saying that we don't need all the personal attacks and abrasiveness, calling people ignorant

 

Not only has that always been the case via the site's rules, but I'm at a loss to identify this supposed preponderance of attacks and the like. Who was called ignorant and when?

 

I must have missed something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, crenca said:

 At this point, anybody who maintains that there is a technical justification for any of MQA's aspects is either ignorant or a confidence man.  

 

 

2 minutes ago, MikeyFresh said:

 

Not only has that always been the case via the site's rules, but I'm at a loss to identify this supposed preponderance of attacks and the like. Who was called ignorant and when?

 

I must have missed something.

 

You certainly did. 

 


Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...