MQA is Vaporware

[Tintinabulum]

Im sat here comparing a Meridian Ultra DAC through Wilsons and an 818v3 through same and also Meridian speakers. MQA is great, I suspect you need fast/highbandwidth amps(whatever they are) as per the new Meridian power amps and the SE speaker amps (same thing) to get the full effect. Nice to discuss what's needed along those lines (are valve amps fast?) and what other factors affect the full appreciation. Excuse my language but chat about that would be much more interesting than the eternal (Crenca) bitching that goes on here... Back to the listening... Tracks vary significantly in how much improvement MQA brings, why is that? Sorry to interrupt the bitching. Back to it lads!

[Michael Lavorgna]

Are you implying it's not? The website of The Enthusiast Network, conveniently not linked to from its brand sites, makes it blatantly obvious that it exists to sell ad space. Nothing inherently wrong with that, but insisting it ain't so looks rather dishonest.

What I am saying is that the Editorial content, i.e. what you read on AudioStream, is no way, shape, or form, influenced by advertising.

 

If I have not stated this point clearly, in other words if you see some "wiggle room" for an "out", please let me know and I will restate is as many times and in as many ways in order to make you understand the truth.

[mav52]

This is one of hundreds of active threads here. I admit there might be a "car crash" effect going on here: Even disinterested people will slow down and gawk.

 

.

 

So true Its like a wreck on the highway, everyone slows down to look and just backs up the traffic while nothing gets accomplished as they lose their way .

[Samuel T Cogley]

"you are in the business you are in and it does (obviously) have real limitations on how it views "the industry" and most importantly here, how it sees things from a consumer perspective (i.e. it has very little consumer perspective)."

 

Please describe how this works, in detail. You see, I know you are wrong so I'm interested in understanding how you think these things work.

 

With due respect, didn't you subtly acknowledge that using your position to chastise Warner for all the dynamically compromised material in their MQA dump is not in your best interests? An honest question, not saying I know the answer.

[whoozwah]

Not a lot of talk about hifi going on here these days...It turns the innocents off you know.

 

to be honest, this thread really was never about hifi. It is about dragging an emerging standard through the mud due to the content control implications inherent in its delivery method. In other words, *** the police.

[Samuel T Cogley]

Im sat here comparing a Meridian Ultra DAC through Wilsons and an 818v3 through same and also Meridian speakers. MQA is great, I suspect you need fast/highbandwidth amps(whatever they are) as per the new Meridian power amps and the SE speaker amps (same thing) to get the full effect. Nice to discuss what's needed along those lines (are valve amps fast?) and what other factors affect the full appreciation. Excuse my language but chat about that would be much more interesting than the eternal (Crenca) bitching that goes on here... Back to the listening... Tracks vary significantly in how much improvement MQA brings, why is that? Sorry to interrupt the bitching. Back to it lads!

 

This thread is a discussion/debate on whether or not MQA is "vaporware". There are many other technical and listening threads on MQA at CA. You might find one of those more in line with what you're looking for.

[Michael Lavorgna]

Im sat here comparing a Meridian Ultra DAC through Wilsons and an 818v3 through same and also Meridian speakers. MQA is great, I suspect you need fast/highbandwidth amps(whatever they are) as per the new Meridian power amps and the SE speaker amps (same thing) to get the full effect. Nice to discuss what's needed along those lines (are valve amps fast?) and what other factors affect the full appreciation. Excuse my language but chat about that would be much more interesting than the eternal (Crenca) bitching that goes on here... Back to the listening... Tracks vary significantly in how much improvement MQA brings, why is that? Sorry to interrupt the bitching. Back to it lads!

 

You raise a very good point. The system we use to evaluate...anything...is critical in terms of our ability to speak to what we hear. For example, if someone is comparing MQA tracks from Tidal to non-MQA tracks on their laptop speakers, you can be sure that any real difference will be masked as compared to a more revealing system. I know this is obvious, but I thought it worth a mention.

[Michael Lavorgna]

With due respect, didn't you subtly acknowledge that using your position to chastise Warner for all the dynamically compromised material in their MQA dump is not in your best interests? An honest question, not saying I know the answer.

I have no idea what you are talking about. Can you point to my words on this subject?

[Samuel T Cogley]

So true Its like a wreck on the highway, everyone slows down to look and just backs up the traffic while nothing gets accomplished as they lose their way .

Speaking strictly for myself, I think this thread has exposed a glimpse of some of the dissent in audiophilia. That Mr. Lavorgna is willing to participate is laudable, based on the name recognition he enjoys.

[Samuel T Cogley]

I have no idea what you are talking about. Can you point to my words on this subject?

 

Instead of that, can you characterize your willingness to regularly deliver such a message to the major labels? Surely you have contacts?

[jbwhite]

That is just part of the War on Science. The very highly paid PR firms that the tobacco industry hired was re-hired by the Oil&Gas industry to attack scientists. Add in the attacks by the chemical industry on scientists (e.g. Monsanto's attacks on Dr. Tyrone Hayes*) and some others, and there you are.

* A Valuable Reputation - The New Yorker

 

Some more good food for thought. I agree 100% with your apparent view that many things, like highly paid PR firms, the interest of hack scientists being paid to do fake science for pharma, oil & gas, tobacco industry etc. undermine science. That is very obvious.

What I don't get is what that has to do with forum members exchanging completely unsubstantiated claims, with little or no evidence cited, in a rude and disruptive manner.

 

How, exactly, does this promote good science?

[Michael Lavorgna]

Instead of that, can you characterize your willingness to regularly deliver such a message to the major labels? Surely you have contacts?

I am able to contact the major labels, but I do have "contacts" in what I view as the normal use of that word. In other words, I cannot call Craig Kallman on the phone.

 

I also am not a cheerleader for the labels as crenca seems to be suggesting. Exhibit A:

 

"Thursday, January 5 was the first day of the show and also the date of the Digital Entertainment Group's Hi-Res Audio Update. For the most part I felt a strong sense of déjà vu (not the CSN&Y song but that would kinda make sense too) as the language used to describe the hi-res listening experience had more goosebumps and raised hairs on the backs of necks than a tower of giraffes in a blizzard."

DEG Hi-Res Audio Update | AudioStream

 

 

My thoughts on improving the quality of recordings are touched on briefly here as well:

 

"I would hope that with the wider adoption of delivering the best digital file quality available, CD-quality on up, the word will trickle all the way back to the music makers in the studio so they turn an attentive ear toward capturing and delivering their craft."

 

In my experience and opinion, convincing "the industry" to improve the quality of recordings is not limited to "the labels".

[smartin]

Really??? That's not what their bios say. Are you accusing them of fabricating their credentials?

 

This is a good example of another pitfall of comment sections (and car wreck forum threads...). People get so fired up they stop using their brain and rush to post without actually reading...

 

He was saying that exploring WHY their data showed that would be a good PhD dissertation...

[Norton]

This thread is a discussion/debate on whether or not MQA is "vaporware". There are many other technical and listening threads on MQA at CA. You might find one of those more in line with what you're looking for.

 

I would have thought that Tintinabulum's post was de facto evidence that MQA is not vaporware: "software or hardware that has been advertised but is not yet available to buy, either because it is only a concept or because it is still being written or designed."

 

I have no interest in MQA but the premise of this thread is absurd bearing in mind I can buy an MQA DAC on the high street of my small English town and download or stream MQA titles today. Therefore MQA is by definition not vaporware. Does anything more need to be said?

[plissken]

Children say things like "You are poopy head." That does not make someone a poopy head.

 

You say I'm a coward and hack which in reality means you *think* I'm a coward and a hack. Which is fine by me.

 

The idea that you appear to not understand the difference is where we disconnect.

 

I supported my position. I used terms in a reasonably dictionary defined way. I've explained why each was used. I think you are such and you think I'm a bitch and buttercup. You think others are acting like an ass.

 

Doing some quick googlefu "archimago site:audiostream.com" returns me all indexed content at your site that contains Archimago.

 

Feb 23, 2015:

 

"

I know exactly where you stand on this subject and you should know exactly where I stand. Frankly, I find most of your posts here to be nothing more than adverts for your own blog, Archimago. And I wish you the best of luck with your site but I am getting tired of your endlessly repeating the same thing, over and over again here."

 

I've also read the comments from Feb 11, 2015

 

Participation before that was Nov, 17th 2014 so I've discounted anything from that date and prior.

 

I've seen zero evidence of Archimago being anything other than civil. He certainly made counterpoints and lots of them.

[jbwhite]

This is a good example of another pitfall of comment sections (and car wreck forum threads...). People get so fired up they stop using their brain and rush to post without actually reading...

 

He was saying that exploring WHY their data showed that would be a good PhD dissertation...

 

Thank you. Got it, and it's funny.

[Samuel T Cogley]

I am able to contact the major labels, but I do have "contacts" in what I view as the normal use of that word. In other words, I cannot call Craig Kallman on the phone.

 

I also am not a cheerleader for the labels as crenca seems to be suggesting. Exhibit A:

 

"Thursday, January 5 was the first day of the show and also the date of the Digital Entertainment Group's Hi-Res Audio Update. For the most part I felt a strong sense of déjà vu (not the CSN&Y song but that would kinda make sense too) as the language used to describe the hi-res listening experience had more goosebumps and raised hairs on the backs of necks than a tower of giraffes in a blizzard."

DEG Hi-Res Audio Update | AudioStream

 

 

My thoughts on improving the quality of recordings are touched on briefly here as well:

 

"I would hope that with the wider adoption of delivering the best digital file quality available, CD-quality on up, the word will trickle all the way back to the music makers in the studio so they turn an attentive ear toward capturing and delivering their craft."

 

In my experience and opinion, convincing "the industry" to improve the quality of recordings is not limited to "the labels".

 

It's not the unambiguous response I was hoping for, but I appreciate that you responded.

[Samuel T Cogley]

I would have thought that Tintinabulum's post was de facto evidence that MQA is not vaporware: "software or hardware that has been advertised but is not yet available to buy, either because it is only a concept or because it is still being written or designed."

 

I have no interest in MQA but the premise of this thread is absurd bearing in mind I can buy an MQA DAC on the high street of my small English town and download or stream MQA titles today. Therefore MQA is by definition not vaporware. Does anything more need to be said?

 

There is a threshold of level of adoption that the OP contends has not been reached yet.

[crenca]

In my experience and opinion, convincing "the industry" to improve the quality of recordings is not limited to "the labels".

 

Too true - the disinterest from the majority of the artists themselves is widely known and something I find perplexing. Not sure what anyone could do about this...

[Michael Lavorgna]

I supported my position. I used terms in a reasonably dictionary defined way. I've explained why each was used. I think you are such and you think I'm a bitch and buttercup. You think others are acting like an ass.

 

Doing some quick googlefu "archimago site:audiostream.com" returns me all indexed content at your site that contains Archimago.

 

Feb 23, 2015:

 

"

I know exactly where you stand on this subject and you should know exactly where I stand. Frankly, I find most of your posts here to be nothing more than adverts for your own blog, Archimago. And I wish you the best of luck with your site but I am getting tired of your endlessly repeating the same thing, over and over again here."

 

I've also read the comments from Feb 11, 2015

 

Participation before that was Nov, 17th 2014 so I've discounted anything from that date and prior.

 

I've seen zero evidence of Archimago being anything other than civil. He certainly made counterpoints and lots of them.

 

You don't see the comments he was banned for because I either edit them out when there's something of substance or I delete the entire comment when there is nothing of substance.

 

Look, plissken, if you call me a coward and hack and follow that up with you're going to say these things to my face, you can expect a strong response from me. Is this appropriate behavior? No. But that's what you'll get from me. Id' suggest if you this kind of thing upsets you, you should tone down your own comments.

[crenca]

I would have thought that Tintinabulum's post was de facto evidence that MQA is not vaporware: "software or hardware that has been advertised but is not yet available to buy, either because it is only a concept or because it is still being written or designed."

 

I have no interest in MQA but the premise of this thread is absurd bearing in mind I can buy an MQA DAC on the high street of my small English town and download or stream MQA titles today. Therefore MQA is by definition not vaporware. Does anything more need to be said?

 

Much more, much more. "vaporware" means several things, like does it really add value over other formats? Tintinabulum likes what he is hearing - yet others decidedly do not. Why? What about the "digititus", how is he missing that? etc. etc. etc.

[plissken]

Since you have no idea why he was banned, your basis for "buying" anything is all in your imagination.

 

Archimago repeadely made the false claim that the content on AudioStream was written to support our advertisers. I asked him, in emails, to refrain from making this fasle claim and simply stick to the facts at hand.

 

He was unable to follow this simple request so he was banned.

 

"AudioStream was written to support our advertisers"

 

Not an unreasonable conclusion by reasonable people that understand how audio reproduction works IMO.

 

My read is you trumped up the excuse that he was hawking his blog at your site and banned him.

 

I'll go and search for Sully next.

[Michael Lavorgna]

It's not the unambiguous response I was hoping for, but I appreciate that you responded.

 

I've discussed this subject on AS for years.

 

In my experience, complaining to "the labels" about dynamic compression is not effective in any way. What I will say is that I am unambiguously *not* a fan of the major labels. Ive also been clear about this this on AS. Which is why I regularly promote sites like Bandcamp.

[Michael Lavorgna]

"AudioStream was written to support our advertisers"

 

Not an unreasonable conclusion by reasonable people that understand how audio reproduction works IMO.

 

My read is you trumped up the excuse that he was hawking his blog at your site and banned him.

 

I'll go and search for Sully next.

 

 

See my previous response to you.

[crenca]

I've discussed this subject on AS for years.

 

In my experience, complaining to "the labels" about dynamic compression is not effective in any way. What I will say is the unambiguously *not* a fan of the major labels. Ive also been clear on this on AS. Which is why I regularly promote sites like Bandcamp.

 

Thinking about Bandcamp (which I love by the way - scared to think how much of my $ they have) I wonder if they (or any "indie" effort) is a solution to the poor recording problem. They admit that the majority of their customers download the MP3 instead of the 16/44 even though it is the same price! This would indicate to me that the real root of the problem is the musical consumer - the majority just don't demand or expect good recordings....