MQA is Vaporware

[John Dyson]

1 hour ago, Shadders said:

Hi,

If possible, can you comment on the impact of MQA on the blossoming market of DSP room correction, and other technologies, where the removal of access to the digital audio data stream means that those products are rendered useless.

 

 

I think that you are describing a very important opportunity that is destroyed by MQA (unless resolved to analog/convert to digital/process/convert back.)  That is an audiophile's h*ll..  MQA simply restricts options, takes away usefulness, takes away casual/legal forms of freedom, takes away whatever amount of money, take take take take, limit limit limit.  The 'goodness' in MQA  would mostly be anachronistic.

Well, MQA would also make unpleasant long discussions between technophobes, technophiles, and the technically very competent.    Those discussions are usually very frustrating, mostly useless, and sometimes antagonistic (even grownups can let themselves get trapped in those messes...)

Bottom line -- it just isn't for today -- maybe yesterday, but not today.  If MQA was done yesterday, today we might have had a much more restrictive, limiting audio world.  Certainly the audio quality would be no better than it is today either.

 

John

[John_Atkinson]

42 minutes ago, mav52 said:

This must be it John

 

"This stuff works! The cost per disc of this tweak is almost zero...it offers a big bang for the buck and can be confidently recommended!" – John Atkinson, Stereophile

From Music Direct  and Amazon even shows it,

 

John if you didn't say it, then a lot of people are thinking you did. 

A search on the Stereophile website for the phrase "this stuff works" didn't throw up anything to do with CD StopLight, so I looked in the back issue archive and found this about CD StopLight in the October 1992 "Recommended Components": "'This stuff works' reports JE [Jack English], PvW [Peter van Willenswaard], and JA [John Atkinson] . . ."

 

I then did a search for the phrase "bang for the buck" on the Stereophile website and found this text from July 1995 : "In April's "Letters" (p.13), I commented rather negatively on CD Stoplight. Since penning that response I've done some more experimenting, and perhaps my dismissal of the green-ink tweak was too hasty . . . The CD Stoplight offers a clear improvement in sound quality that it takes the $695 UltraJitterbug or $1495 DTI Pro to equal. The cost per disc of this tweak is almost zero, meaning that it offers a big bang for the buck and can be confidently recommended. But as to why CD Stoplight has any effect, don’t ask!“ Scroll down the page at https://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/795awsi/index.html

 

So it looks as if the creators of the ad extracted and combined the text from the two passages, one from 1992 and the other from 1995. However, I am confident they didn't ask for permission as if they had have done, I would have insisted on the month and year of publication be included in the attribution, so people reading the ad can see how old the quoted text is. And it is certainly not a paid endorsement, which the original poster appeared to be implying.

 

John Atkinson

Editor (for a few hours more), Stereophile

 

[John Dyson]

17 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

A search on the Stereophile website for the phrase "this stuff works" didn't throw up anything to do with CD StopLight, so I looked in the back issue archive and found this about CD StopLight in the October 1992 "Recommended Components": "'This stuff works' reports JE [Jack English], PvW [Peter van Willenswaard], and JA [John Atkinson] . . ."

 

 

Kind suggestion -- please dont' let yours (or any) publication to be used for political/raw profiteering purposes (unless it is a paid advert.)  Opinions are okay, if appropriately labeled.  It is SOOO difficult nowadays, because opinions are so often conflated with accuracy (sometimes opinons are accurate, but even then should be appropriately labeled.)

I don't know how to make sure that people are 'straight' (I mean in the truthful, integrity, knowledge sense, not in personal attributes), or confused.  I guess that is where expertise in editing and double checking comes into play.  (The major news media in particular hasn't been very good about having/practicing with integrity lately -- and I hope it doesn't get worse.)

 

John

[mav52]

20 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

A search on the Stereophile website for the phrase "this stuff works" didn't throw up anything to do with CD StopLight, so I looked in the back issue archive and found this about CD StopLight in the October 1992 "Recommended Components": "'This stuff works' reports JE [Jack English], PvW [Peter van Willenswaard], and JA [John Atkinson] . . ."

 

I then did a search for the phrase "bang for the buck" on the Stereophile website and found this text from July 1995 : "In April's "Letters" (p.13), I commented rather negatively on CD Stoplight. Since penning that response I've done some more experimenting, and perhaps my dismissal of the green-ink tweak was too hasty . . . The CD Stoplight offers a clear improvement in sound quality that it takes the $695 UltraJitterbug or $1495 DTI Pro to equal. The cost per disc of this tweak is almost zero, meaning that it offers a big bang for the buck and can be confidently recommended. But as to why CD Stoplight has any effect, don’t ask!“ Scroll down the page at https://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/795awsi/index.html

 

So it looks as if the creators of the ad extracted and combined the text from the two passages, one from 1992 and the other from 1995. However, I am confident they didn't ask for permission as if they had have done, I would have insisted on the month and year of publication be included in the attribution, so people reading the ad can see how old the quoted text is. And it is certainly not a paid endorsement, which the original poster appeared to be implying.

 

John Atkinson

Editor (for a few hours more), Stereophile

 

Since you didn't say it, why not get that quote removed from say Music Direct https://www.musicdirect.com/equipment/audioprism-cd-stoplight

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

2 hours ago, Currawong said:

To be fair to JA, I think the suggestion that they are trying to market MQA is somewhat unfair. I noticed Herb Reichert gently pissed on MQA in the Kitsune DAC review, for example. 

 

Of "the acoustic objects within the stereo image having somewhat greater palpability", this reminds me of my impressions of the MQA-similar GTO filter in the iFi Pro iDSD, which brings instruments more forward, and makes them feel a bit livelier. My issue would be that the whole MQA process is unnecessary to get that kind of result with music. 

 

Not unlike how the slightly V-shaped sound signature of tubes (something which a designer I know could fake in solid-state circuits by adjusting the crosstalk) and even-order harmonics make the music sound "richer" (or whatever word one wishes to use) I think MQA simply picked distortions that would appeal most to listeners. But again, the whole process is simply a trick, and the MQA folding, and etc. is completely unnecessary.

 

 

CW:

 

I just read that DAC review by Reichert. I am not sure where he "pissed" on MQA....

 

Reviewing nice affordable digital  products from small manufacturers, like let's say, a ladder DAC, and wanting to recommend it puts Stereophile writers in a pickle because they have to figure out how to handle the MQA thing. based on their editorial obsession with marketing it. Here Reichert choses the strategy to down play it. Interestingly he chooses to really spotlight DSD. 

 

This was not the case when he reviewed several MyTek DACs and fell in love with MQA to the point that the Schiit DAC, (very similar to the Kitsune) that was his "reference" was kicked to the curb because if did not decode MQA.

 

They simply cannot have it both ways, 

[Teresa]

27 minutes ago, mav52 said:

Since you didn't say it, why not get that quote removed from say Music Direct https://www.musicdirect.com/equipment/audioprism-cd-stoplight

 

I don't think he needs to, did you notice it says "Product is no longer available". also the page is not searchable at Music Direct. Search result for AudioPrism is "No results found for AudioPrism" and CD Stoplight show "No results found for CD Stoplight".

 

https://www.musicdirect.com/equipment/audioprism-cd-stoplight appears to be a dead page perhaps found in an internet search. At any rate Music Direct no longer sales CD Stoplight.

[KeenObserver]

59 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

A search on the Stereophile website for the phrase "this stuff works" didn't throw up anything to do with CD StopLight, so I looked in the back issue archive and found this about CD StopLight in the October 1992 "Recommended Components": "'This stuff works' reports JE [Jack English], PvW [Peter van Willenswaard], and JA [John Atkinson] . . ."

 

I then did a search for the phrase "bang for the buck" on the Stereophile website and found this text from July 1995 : "In April's "Letters" (p.13), I commented rather negatively on CD Stoplight. Since penning that response I've done some more experimenting, and perhaps my dismissal of the green-ink tweak was too hasty . . . The CD Stoplight offers a clear improvement in sound quality that it takes the $695 UltraJitterbug or $1495 DTI Pro to equal. The cost per disc of this tweak is almost zero, meaning that it offers a big bang for the buck and can be confidently recommended. But as to why CD Stoplight has any effect, don’t ask!“ Scroll down the page at https://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/795awsi/index.html

 

So it looks as if the creators of the ad extracted and combined the text from the two passages, one from 1992 and the other from 1995. However, I am confident they didn't ask for permission as if they had have done, I would have insisted on the month and year of publication be included in the attribution, so people reading the ad can see how old the quoted text is. And it is certainly not a paid endorsement, which the original poster appeared to be implying.

 

John Atkinson

Editor (for a few hours more), Stereophile

 

 

Description

A Stereophile Recommended Accessory for the Last 18 Years: Recommended by John Atkinson, Sam Tellig and Robert Harley

The AudioPrism CD Stoplight (the green pen) is the original CD tweak. Just paint the edges of your CDs to greatly reduce disc read errors and reduce jitter while improving clarity and reducing glare. We have sold the CD Stoplight to thousands of customers in the last decade. This tweak really works and it's affordable and simple to use.

"This stuff works! The cost per disc of this tweak is almost zero...it offers a big bang for the buck and can be confidently recommended!" – John Atkinson, Stereophile

 

Apparently,  you missed it for at least 18 years!

[mav52]

3 minutes ago, Teresa said:

 

I don't think he needs to, did you notice it says "Product is no longer available". also the page is not searchable at Music Direct. Search result for AudioPrism is "No results found for AudioPrism" and CD Stoplight show "No results found for CD Stoplight".

 

https://www.musicdirect.com/equipment/audioprism-cd-stoplight appears to be a dead page perhaps found in an internet search. At any rate Music Direct no longer sales CD Stoplight.

 

True,  misleading information is all over the net, 

[KeenObserver]

I just think it puts the endorsement for MQA in perspective!

[mansr]

1 hour ago, John_Atkinson said:

A search on the Stereophile website for the phrase "this stuff works" didn't throw up anything to do with CD StopLight, so I looked in the back issue archive and found this about CD StopLight in the October 1992 "Recommended Components": "'This stuff works' reports JE [Jack English], PvW [Peter van Willenswaard], and JA [John Atkinson] . . ."

 

I then did a search for the phrase "bang for the buck" on the Stereophile website and found this text from July 1995 : "In April's "Letters" (p.13), I commented rather negatively on CD Stoplight. Since penning that response I've done some more experimenting, and perhaps my dismissal of the green-ink tweak was too hasty . . . The CD Stoplight offers a clear improvement in sound quality that it takes the $695 UltraJitterbug or $1495 DTI Pro to equal. The cost per disc of this tweak is almost zero, meaning that it offers a big bang for the buck and can be confidently recommended. But as to why CD Stoplight has any effect, don’t ask!“ Scroll down the page at https://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/795awsi/index.html

Do you still believe that it works?

[KeenObserver]

Just out of curiosity, did Sam Tellig endorse MQA?

[Kal Rubinson]

2 hours ago, Shadders said:

If possible, can you comment on the impact of MQA on the blossoming market of DSP room correction, and other technologies, where the removal of access to the digital audio data stream means that those products are rendered useless.

This has been a concern of mine along with MQA's total lack of multichannel support.  In both cases, MQA has stated that such matters will be addressed in the future.  However, they only add to the reasons why I find MQA more than unnecessary and more of an impediment.

[firedog]

1 hour ago, mav52 said:

Since you didn't say it, why not get that quote removed from say Music Direct https://www.musicdirect.com/equipment/audioprism-cd-stoplight

I think,  as he hinted before, "fair use" entitles them to quote him in small amounts, even if they link two pieces that weren't written together. 

[firedog]

33 minutes ago, mansr said:

Do you still believe that it works?

Why not, I thought it was established that it increased (apparently) euphonic jitter? 

[garrardguy60]

22 hours ago, shtf said:

Maybe one day a former Stereophile reviewer with some integrity and listening skills, if such a one exists, will write a variation on Stereophile magazine.  

 

There'd definitely be some money for that author.  Oops.  I hope that idea doesn't jeopardize anybody's "reputation" and retirement plan.

 

 

 

We already have that person [though he's not ex-Stereophile]. It is Archimago and his blog.

[John Dyson]

1 hour ago, mav52 said:

r

 

1 minute ago, firedog said:

Why not, I thought it was established that it increased (apparently) euphonic jitter? 

Unlike laserdisk, there is no jitter from the platter that can be propagated.  It is similar to the jitter in the internet.  Internet 'jitter' can be seconds, yet we all can listen.  The 'jitter' or speed variations are taken care of by buffering.  Then only actual jitter is in the last D/A in the chain (whatever clock noise, D/A noise, ground noise that there might be.)

The data is effectively purely digital without slight differences when the timing changes (as long as the data stays in the detectoin window.)  Laserdisks on the other hand were analog, and the speed variations (without time base correction) would be reproduced on the TV screen.

Laserdisk timing wasn't good enough to directly connect to my super duper high quality D9 decks, I used a DPS290 TBC to convert the unstable laser disk to stable broadcast timing.

CDs, on the other hand, are 'time base corrected' (effectively.)  The jitter in the system is associated with your last D/A (or grounding/etc as I mentioned above.)

It is SOOOO easy to fool oneself with listening comparisons...  I also fool myself with audio comparisons from time to time.  IT is incredibly difficult to do correctly.

 

John

[mansr]

57 minutes ago, firedog said:

Why not, I thought it was established that it increased (apparently) euphonic jitter? 

Was it though? I'll I've ever seen is a grainy video with a blurry photo of a fuzzy scope image with no scales on the axes and no explanation of what was being measured. That is hardly proof of anything.

[shtf]

2 hours ago, garrardguy60 said:

 

We already have that person [though he's not ex-Stereophile]. It is Archimago and his blog.

 

Yes, there is Archimago who is invaluable from a technical perspective but as you say, he's not former Stereophile.  Nor is Archimago exactly known for his keen listening skills.  At least not that I'm aware of.

[Rt66indierock]

17 minutes ago, shtf said:

 

Yes, there is Archimago who is invaluable from a technical perspective but as you say, he's not former Stereophile.  Nor is Archimago exactly known for his keen listening skills.  At least not that I'm aware of.

 

Who at Stereophile is known for their keen listening skills?

[mansr]

8 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

Who at Stereophile is known for their keen listening skills?

All the writers' wives. From the kitchen.

[shtf]

14 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Who at Stereophile is known for their keen listening skills?

 

Why, Jim Austin of course.  Why else would Atkinson choose Jimmy to take the helm at Stereophile?  Unless you're insinuating that it's not really all about the music at Stereophile.  Are you? 

[rando]

5 hours ago, John_Atkinson said:

John Atkinson

Editor (for a few hours more), Stereophile

 

At the very least you can walk away knowing applicants to determine whose tuchus the cork in your celebratory bottle of champagne will attempt to lodge itself in are still apace after all these years.  🍾

[John Dyson]

3 hours ago, mansr said:

Was it though? I'll I've ever seen is a grainy video with a blurry photo of a fuzzy scope image with no scales on the axes and no explanation of what was being measured. That is hardly proof of anything.

Sometimes -- if there was reallly noise, there can be ground noise that is mistaken for jitter.  It is a really difficult problem -- mixing analog circuitry (esp high precision analog) with digital.  It is very easy to create myths to explain away all kinds of behaviors.  The biggest problem for non-technical people (I don't mean non-audio people, I mean people who aren't the EEs who really understand) is that there is a LOT of misinformation, and a lot of misinformation feeding on misinformation.  Eventually all of the mistaken falsehoods become true?  Well, I dont't think so.  However, there are apparently a lot of people solving the 'jitter problem' (which if really solved, is keeping grounds properly separated , making sure that the clock isn't noisy (which can be caused by noisy ground), and good quality components.)  Jitter doesn't have very much to do with the digital signal -- it lives in the analog world and directly in the conversion process.  Of course, when clocks jitter -- the process of creating the digital clock IS analog, and ground noise can modulate the clock (PM/AM type noise.)

Then, after the board is properly designed, bypassed, etc -- finally the noise source is the same kind of thing that creates hiss in any amplifier -- the oscillator (usually high frequencies) will be modulated by the transistor (and other circuit) noise sources.  Sadly, usually high frequency transistors have poor low frequency noise performance -- so it is an interesting challenge to produce a low AM/PM noise oscillator.  There ARE some tricks, but the bottom line is that after all of the outside physical noise sources are resolved, then the transistor noise itself becomes an issue.  JFETS are a little better in this regard (LF noise) because usually a JFET has good HF and LF noise, while high frequency BJTS tend to have high LF noise.  (TOO MUCH REAL TECH HERE!!!) :-).

This clock noise thing does legitimize a separate clock device (if it is done correctly.)  Separating the ground is crucial, and if the circuit board(s) aren't designed right, then the digital world (as noise) will interfere with the analog (but not-so-much the other way around.)

 

John

[Rt66indierock]

20 minutes ago, shtf said:

 

Why, Jim Austin of course.  Why else would Atkinson choose Jimmy to take the helm at Stereophile?  Unless you're insinuating that it's not really all about the music at Stereophile.  Are you? 

 

Jim Austin was chosen for his experience as an editor at Science. And he needed a full-time job. Actually I'm documenting Stereophile isn't about the music.  If it was about the music John Atkinson would treat Bob Stuart the same way he treats Gary Dews of BorderPatrol. Not give him the time of day. And you would never have heard of MQA.

[garrardguy60]

33 minutes ago, shtf said:

 

Why, Jim Austin of course.  Why else would Atkinson choose Jimmy to take the helm at Stereophile?  Unless you're insinuating that it's not really all about the music at Stereophile.  Are you? 

 

I would think that it was Paul Miller who picked Jim, or at the very least had the final say. [I say this with all due respect to John Atkinson; my comments are not meant to be in any way critical of him. It's more the case that it's been my observation that bosses/owners make these kinds of decision, rather than [even high-level] employees.]

 

MORE IMPORTANT, in my mind, is the fact that Stereophile recently reviewed an affordable product. And when I say ''affordable,'' I mean to you and me, not as in Stereophile's definition [e.g., ''though this amplifier fails to support MQA -- the greatest development in audiophilia since oxygen-free cooper -- we give it props for being an affordable option at a very reasonable $2,500 [base model; chassis enclosure and output transistors not included].

 

Anyway, back to my point. I was pleasantly shocked a few weeks back when Stereophile reviewed the Klipsch RP-600M bookshelf speakers [$549]. Here, I am hoping that this is also Mr. Miller's influence and that he intends to make Stereophile and its sister sites a little more relevant to audiophiles with normal, human-scale incomes. 

 

I am very hopeful in that regard. As for Mr. Austin, since he has a doctorate in physics, it is clearly not his intellectual capabilities holding him back from understanding the realities of MQA.