MQA is Vaporware

[Lee Scoggins]

2 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

He didn't realize I've been keeping track of people using intellectually dishonest debate techniques. He reached a threshold today.

 

You accused me of being unethical.  What do you expect one to respond with?

 

You can disagree with my viewpoints and my opinions on MQA, but to imply I am unethical is going over the line.

[MikeyFresh]

1 hour ago, Lee Scoggins said:

MQA is not degrading any of Peter's recordings.  It's making the instruments sound more natural.

 

Not according to the McGill study, nor even your fantasy assemblage of recording engineers at the behest of David Chesky (through the use of his super-connected status).

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

Just now, Paul R said:

 

To be fair, you baited him knowing that it would result in a rude comment. (shrug)

 

So far as I can see, you both are a bit guilty there. Probably should apologize to each other and move on with more profitable discussion.  And ignore the people egging on the hard feelings. 

 

 

Honestly, stop the nonsense. We are all big boys here. Mr. Lee is a child.😎

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

1 minute ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

You accused me of being unethical.  What do you expect one to respond with?

 

You can disagree with my viewpoints and my opinions on MQA, but to imply I am unethical is going over the line.

Bye....

[Lee Scoggins]

1 minute ago, Paul R said:

 

To be fair, you baited him knowing that it would result in a rude comment. (shrug)

 

So far as I can see, you both are a bit guilty there. Probably should apologize to each other and move on with more profitable discussion.  And ignore the people egging on the hard feelings. 

 

 

 

Past history has shown that my attempts to move forward in a positive direction have only resulted in many personal attacks and snide comments from Steve.  I would apologize if it would make a difference but it won't.

[Paul R]

1 minute ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

The bank records are not a good analogy.  In that case even pennies count.  In the music world, things below the inaudible level don't count.

 

As for the needledrops, I hear the same thing.  But you just use 24/176 or 24/192 and everything is fine.  But it's not just the things above 20khz that hirez captures better, it's the extra detail and timbre in the midrange and other areas.

 

Ah, but if all the bank computers trimmed was information that did matter and didn't count... wouldn't it still bother you? Especially if they refused to tell you exactly what information they trimmed? It could be parts of your payment records, for instance. 

 

It may not have any effect on you at all, but the idea is disturbing, right?  Exact same thing applies to MQA. It took forever to get people to accept high resolution made a difference at all. MQA is trying to say that they know exactly what does and does not make a difference.  That is disturbing in and of itself. 

 

-Paul 

 

[MikeyFresh]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Please don’t tell me you know how every instrument in every orchestra sounds either. Ask any violinist if the violins are all the same and s/he will obviously say no. Thus, saying you know the sound of John Doe’s violin and it sounded more natural is preposterous. 

 

That's right, and John Doe's violin will sound different in different venues (acoustic spaces and/or when recorded using different mics/mic preamps etc...)

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

Just now, Lee Scoggins said:

 

Past history has shown that my attempts to move forward in a positive direction have only resulted in many personal attacks and snide comments from Steve.  I would apologize if it would make a difference but it won't.

B Y E!!!

[kumakuma]

4 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

In the music world, things below the inaudible level don't count.

 

As for the needledrops, I hear the same thing.  But you just use 24/176 or 24/192 and everything is fine.  But it's not just the things above 20khz that hirez captures better, it's the extra detail and timbre in the midrange and other areas.

 

These two statements contradict each other unless, of course, you are claiming that you can hear up 88.2 or 96 kHz.

[Paul R]

3 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

Past history has shown that my attempts to move forward in a positive direction have only resulted in many personal attacks and snide comments from Steve.  I would apologize if it would make a difference but it won't.

 

Take the high road and ignore the rabble.

 

I would be interested in a well thought out reply to Chris comment for example. Are some of the MQA rationalizations as unreasonable as the anti-vaxxers positions? If so, it is just ban appearance, or are there real underlying reasons. 

 

-Paul 

 

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

1 minute ago, Paul R said:

 

Take the high road and ignore the rabble.

 

I would be interested in a well thought out replace to Chris comment for example. Are some of the MQA rationalizations as unreasonable as the anti-vaxxers positions? If so, it is just ban appearance, or are there real underlying reasons. 

 

-Paul 

 

Mr. Lee. has now engaged in name calling and vulgarity twice in one week...I am curious as the consequences. 

[Lee Scoggins]

Just now, Paul R said:

 

Ah, but if all the bank computers trimmed was information that did matter and didn't count... wouldn't it still bother you? Especially if they refused to tell you exactly what information they trimmed? It could be parts of your payment records, for instance. 

 

It may not have any effect on you at all, but the idea is disturbing, right?  Exact same thing applies to MQA. It took forever to get people to accept high resolution made a difference at all. MQA is trying to say that they know exactly what does and does not make a difference.  That is disturbing in and of itself. 

 

-Paul 

 

 

I think the MQA team has made a decision to trim off non-musical data and preserve the hjrez content in order to reach a smaller file size goal. I know we differ on how important that file size is for streaming but I think the MQA team finds it valuable.  Apparently so do the label execs I have talked to.  So MQA is about optimizing goals.  Given that no one will hear the bits they chopped off, I think it was a reasonable decision.

[Paul R]

1 minute ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

Mr. Lee. has now negate in name calling and vulgarity twice in one week...I am curious as the consequences. 

 

You react the same way when you feel attacked or suckered. (shrug) Trust me, I see some of the "Disagree!" markers you post on almost everything I write.

 

I do not take that personal, and I suggest, neither should you. No Klingon Puppies Here! 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

30 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

This is how unserious your forum has gotten Chris.  You are equating having a positive opinion of MQA with the anti-vaxxing crowd.   And you are specifically stating that my opinion is not "believable".

 

There are many professional engineers who favor MQA but I guess these opinions don't count either.

 

There's really no point in debating this anymore here.  Everyone's mind is made up and you are using a mob mentality to ridicule every point I am trying to make.

 

 

Incorrect Lee. I’m not equating anti-vaxxers with people who like MQA at all. That would be foolish. 

 

There are many professionals who like MQA? Are you talking about the same ones that like anything that will get them a free piece of gear or some other fringe benefit? Give me a break Lee. 

 

When you want to talk about facts you will find a great conversation here. 

 

When the evidence is so one-sided it’s just not possible to take your opinion serious. I take you serious as a person, but I think your opinions and reasoning supporting MQA are ridiculous. You’ve ignored every objective fact put in front of you. You take what Bob and Ken and Mike say as the gospel even after they’ve been proven liars.

 

Nobody understands why why you defend MQA so hard in the face of facts that disprove everything about the product. It’s really strange. I just keep thinking, follow the money. 

 

 

25 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

Steve, it's clear you are an idiot and an asshole.  Welcome to my ignore list.

 

Bye Lee. I have to ban you after this behavior. The same rules apply to you as they do Lavorgna, Brian Lucey, and all the others who talk to people this way. 

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

Just now, Paul R said:

 

You react the same way when you feel attacked or suckered. (shrug) Trust me, I see some of the "Disagree!" markers you post on almost everything I write.

 

I do not take that personal, and I suggest, neither should you. No Klingon Puppies Here! 

 

Klingons are worthy foes!! Visceral, low intellect...but tough as nails!😎

[MikeyFresh]

20 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

Steve, it's clear you are an idiot and an asshole.  Welcome to my ignore list.

 

Thats not clear at all, not to me anyway. 

 

You on the other hand? Mmm...yes, all evidence points squarely in that direction.

[Paul R]

2 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

I think the MQA team has made a decision to trim off non-musical data and preserve the hjrez content in order to reach a smaller file size goal. I know we differ on how important that file size is for streaming but I think the MQA team finds it valuable.  Apparently so do the label execs I have talked to.  So MQA is about optimizing goals.  Given that no one will hear the bits they chopped off, I think it was a reasonable decision.

 

Putting aside streaming disagreements, I get confused by your statement here. How can they "lop off bits" that make no difference but the lopping off makes the file "sound better? "

 

If it was just - it sounds exactly the same, I could see some point, but it rather obviously makes the file sound different. Unless indeed, they are playing games boosting or damping this or that frequency. All of which requires changed bits. 

 

I am not even going to try to explain why high -resolution makes the music better, more true, or a mic feed more accurate. I don't know exactly how that operates. :). 

But it does. Therefor, to me at least, taking away this or that bit without explain it is troublesome. 

 

-Paul 

 

[sandyk]

8 minutes ago, Paul R said:

To be fair, you baited him knowing that it would result in a rude comment. (shrug)

 

That has become quite a common thing here in recent years.

 It is quite often used to try and get a member banned who disagrees with them, or as recent poster has done,

capture a comment that was made in the spur of the moment, and would likely have been quickly edited out by the poster, so that it can be reported to Admin with the hope that those who do not agree with them will be either censured or banned from the forum.

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

3 minutes ago, Paul R said:

 

You react the same way when you feel attacked or suckered. (shrug) Trust me, I see some of the "Disagree!" markers you post on almost everything I write.

 

I do not take that personal, and I suggest, neither should you. No Klingon Puppies Here! 

 

I would also suggest that an Off Topic or Disagree marker is light years way from name calling and vulgarity and is free for any one to use with no offense. A false equivalency if there ever was one.

[The Computer Audiophile]

4 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

That has become quite a common thing here in recent years.

 It is quite often used to try and get a member banned who disagrees with them, or as recent poster has done,

capture a comment that was made in the spur of the moment, and would likely have been quickly edited out by the poster, so that it can be reported to Admin with the hope that those who do not agree with them will be either censured or banned from the forum.

You guys with your “he made me do it” rationalizations are killing me. 

 

It’s called taking responsibility for one’s actions. Wish everyone would try it. 

[Paul R]

1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

You guys with your “he made me do it” rationalizations are killing me. 

 

Naw, I suggested to him he apologize.  I just didn't see the provocation as one sided as some other folks.  YMMV.   -Paul 

 

[sandyk]

33 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

These two statements contradict each other unless, of course, you are claiming that you can hear up 88.2 or 96 kHz. 

 

NOBODY is claiming that they can directly hear the upper/ultrasonic frequencies that may be present with 88.2 or 96kHz material, OR with DSD for that matter, but not with RBCD.

 What they are saying is, that for whatever reason, they can notice an audible degradation when genuine musical content at frequencies above 22.05 kHz is removed .

[kumakuma]

24 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Bye Lee. I have to ban you after this behavior. The same rules apply to you as they do Lavorgna, Brian Lucey, and all the others who talk to people this way. 

 

It will be interesting to see who MQA sends next. 

 

I doubt they will be able to match the stamina of Lee "Takes a licking and keeps on ticking" Scoggins though.

 

 

[rickca]

Actually, I was waiting for Lee's Remington moment.  Remember the ad?  I liked it so much I bought the company.

[Indydan]

With the banning of Lee Scoggins, I've updated the chart.

 

 

MQA "enthusiast"                        Reason for no longer posting on CA

Peter Veth                                                          BANNED

WitchDoctor                                                      BANNED

Lee Scoggins                             BANNED for calling someone an asshole and idiot

Michael Lavorgna                      BANNED for telling someone to go fuck his mother

Peter Veth (as Peter Markus)  BANNED for acting like a dick and being an MQA shill

Jim Austin                                         Had a little bit of a meltdown on CA

Andy Schaub as Galileo365     Threw a hissy fit and quit just as he was about to be banned