Popular Post The Computer Audiophile Posted June 10, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted June 10, 2019 If anyone needs a refresher of what frequencies each instruments creates, this is good - http://www.independentrecording.net/irn/resources/freqchart/main_display.htm rando and crenca 1 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Popular Post lucretius Posted June 10, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted June 10, 2019 4 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said: The recording was of a piano. The article of mine that I linked to earlier in the thread showed that piano is an instrument that has negligible spectral content above 15kHz or so. This file, as interesting as its provenance is, proves nothing either way. John Atkinson Technical Editor, Stereophile Fair enough. Perhaps you could perform the experiment (using files with relevant spectral content) and write this up as a Stereophile article? esldude, Teresa, John_Atkinson and 1 other 3 1 mQa is dead! Link to comment
Popular Post Jud Posted June 10, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted June 10, 2019 1 hour ago, Rt66indierock said: And dash your hopes a bit in both of Mark Waldrep's seminars he called both MQA and hi-res a fraud. Doesn't dash my hopes. Mr. Waldrep says a lot I find myself disagreeing with. Seems to me to be marketing of a certain type. MikeyFresh, The Computer Audiophile, asdf1000 and 1 other 2 1 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
Rt66indierock Posted June 10, 2019 Author Share Posted June 10, 2019 4 minutes ago, Jud said: Doesn't dash my hopes. Mr. Waldrep says a lot I find myself disagreeing with. Seems to me to be marketing of a certain type. Other than revisions to his book what he is doing that will put money in his pocket? The rest of his working life will be teaching and liquidating an impressive amount of equipment. Link to comment
Popular Post Jud Posted June 10, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted June 10, 2019 Now that we're back around to one of our perpetual topics, I'll repeat what I said a few pages ago: - Some instruments' harmonics involve an appreciable amount of ultrasonic content that intermodulates to produce the sounds we can hear. I haven't seen studies regarding whether it's somehow audibly better or worse to capture this with mics and put it out through ultrasonic-capable speakers, versus reproducing the audible-range results without ultrasonics. - Seems to me the advantage of hi res vs equivalent Redbook mastering, if any, wouldn't lie so much in ultrasonics but in the non-use of low quality decimation filtering at the ADC end of the chain. - I've heard both Redbook and hi res that sounds great. I'd rather enjoy myself than be doctrinaire. The Computer Audiophile, Teresa and troubleahead 3 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
Ishmael Slapowitz Posted June 10, 2019 Share Posted June 10, 2019 3 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said: Interesting numbers. I always thought Pandora was way bigger than the streaming services. Looking at the Pandora specific numbers it looks like it's larger than the monthly numbers suggest. John Darko says 41% of his 594 Twitter followers use Tidal. https://darko.audio/2019/06/global-feedback-which-music-streaming-service-do-you-mostly-use/ crenca 1 Link to comment
Jud Posted June 10, 2019 Share Posted June 10, 2019 2 hours ago, lucretius said: By 2018, It's all US. Can you clarify? 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 The Computer Audiophile Posted June 10, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted June 10, 2019 15 minutes ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said: John Darko says 41% of his 594 Twitter followers use Tidal. https://darko.audio/2019/06/global-feedback-which-music-streaming-service-do-you-mostly-use/ Statistics by which to make major decisions 😂 Ishmael Slapowitz, lucretius, MikeyFresh and 2 others 2 1 2 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted June 10, 2019 Share Posted June 10, 2019 11 minutes ago, Jud said: Can you clarify? Isn’t Pandora only available in the US, Australia and New Zealand? Jud 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Popular Post lucretius Posted June 10, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted June 10, 2019 50 minutes ago, Jud said: Can you clarify? Pandora is only available in the US. No longer available in Australia and New Zealand. rando and Jud 1 1 mQa is dead! Link to comment
Popular Post esldude Posted June 10, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted June 10, 2019 Well let me see on the higher sampling rates. You can make a case for 96 khz. 40 khz analog bandwidth. Few microphones have response past this. Quite a few that are only spec'd to 20 khz have some response up to 30 khz or a bit more. Few instruments produce sound higher than this and what there is will be really down in level. So the microphones and instruments are all going to drop out in this general area effectively. Even ol'Bob says so which is how he encodes this wonderful MQA. So microphones are a bottleneck, then speakers usually, and then audiophile ears absolutely. Any ringing in transition bands or other yucky processing effects are too high to matter to us. There just isn't a reason to go higher. There is very little reason to go that high. If I rated sound quality with high speed RTR as a reference, I'd rate super excellent cassette as maybe 75%. Regular cassette maybe 40%. I'm not sure on LP. It actually is just an odd beast. No higher than 80% and I could be persuaded it is 50%. How would you rate high rate PCM or MQA vs 48/24 or 4816? I don't think there is 5% gained. Or no more than that. You have no problem at all hearing the differences in the analog mediums I mentioned above. Hearing these hires vs regular res digital files isn't so easy. So getting on topic, if MQA works it doesn't mean much. It is not clear it is a transparent process (we know it is lossy and we know undecoded it isn't transparent). So like said probably hundreds of thousands of times now it is a solution in search of a problem. I mean if the encoding/decoding end to end process took the streamed 96 kbps mp3 and made it sound like CD for the same bit rate, it would be obvious and maybe it would catch on. So it isn't vaporware as it exists somewhat. It might be termed irrelevant-ware. Do we need a new fresh MQA thread. MQA is irrelevant. Somebody might have missed this one. 🧐 crenca, Hugo9000 and Ralf11 3 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
lucretius Posted June 10, 2019 Share Posted June 10, 2019 13 minutes ago, esldude said: So getting on topic, if MQA works it doesn't mean much. As far as hi res content goes. However, there's still the claim that MQA can correct time smears. I'm not even sure what that means and have absolutely no idea how MQA is supposed to achieve the goal. mQa is dead! Link to comment
Rt66indierock Posted June 10, 2019 Author Share Posted June 10, 2019 1 hour ago, esldude said: Well let me see on the higher sampling rates. You can make a case for 96 khz. 40 khz analog bandwidth. Few microphones have response past this. Quite a few that are only spec'd to 20 khz have some response up to 30 khz or a bit more. Few instruments produce sound higher than this and what there is will be really down in level. So the microphones and instruments are all going to drop out in this general area effectively. Even ol'Bob says so which is how he encodes this wonderful MQA. So microphones are a bottleneck, then speakers usually, and then audiophile ears absolutely. Any ringing in transition bands or other yucky processing effects are too high to matter to us. There just isn't a reason to go higher. There is very little reason to go that high. If I rated sound quality with high speed RTR as a reference, I'd rate super excellent cassette as maybe 75%. Regular cassette maybe 40%. I'm not sure on LP. It actually is just an odd beast. No higher than 80% and I could be persuaded it is 50%. How would you rate high rate PCM or MQA vs 48/24 or 4816? I don't think there is 5% gained. Or no more than that. You have no problem at all hearing the differences in the analog mediums I mentioned above. Hearing these hires vs regular res digital files isn't so easy. So getting on topic, if MQA works it doesn't mean much. It is not clear it is a transparent process (we know it is lossy and we know undecoded it isn't transparent). So like said probably hundreds of thousands of times now it is a solution in search of a problem. I mean if the encoding/decoding end to end process took the streamed 96 kbps mp3 and made it sound like CD for the same bit rate, it would be obvious and maybe it would catch on. So it isn't vaporware as it exists somewhat. It might be termed irrelevant-ware. Do we need a new fresh MQA thread. MQA is irrelevant. Somebody might have missed this one. 🧐 There will be a new thread probably in July. I want to see if 7digital survives, how RealNetworks 2nd quarter works out, run down another streaming service rumor and work out a couple of DRM things. Link to comment
MikeyFresh Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 5 minutes ago, Em2016 said: That statista link (stats are as of March 2018) says 49M The various reported numbers vary due to differences in any given report using U.S. vs. worldwide, and also paid vs. total subscribers. Various news outlets reported in late April that worldwide Spotify now has over 100 million paid subs, while Apple has 50 million paid subscribers worldwide. However in the U.S. only, Apple had recently pulled into the lead with 28 million paid, vs. 26 million paid for Spotify. Tidal's subscriber numbers, worldwide or otherwise, paid or free, absolutely pale in comparison... MQA evidently not a magic bullet in competing with the big boys of streaming, they are getting crushed. Even with a big lead in paid subscribers worldwide, Spotify still bleeds money every quarter. From The Verge on April 29th: Spotify is still losing money despite its subscriber growth. The company posted a loss of €142 million ($158.3 million) for the January to March quarter, compared with a loss of €169 million in the same period last year. Ishmael Slapowitz 1 Boycott HDtracks Boycott Lenbrook Boycott Warner Music Group Link to comment
Ishmael Slapowitz Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 44 minutes ago, MikeyFresh said: The various reported numbers vary due to differences in any given report using U.S. vs. worldwide, and also paid vs. total subscribers. Various news outlets reported in late April that worldwide Spotify now has over 100 million paid subs, while Apple has 50 million paid subscribers worldwide. However in the U.S. only, Apple had recently pulled into the lead with 28 million paid, vs. 26 million paid for Spotify. Tidal's subscriber numbers, worldwide or otherwise, paid or free, absolutely pale in comparison... MQA evidently not a magic bullet in competing with the big boys of streaming, they are getting crushed. Even with a big lead in paid subscribers worldwide, Spotify still bleeds money every quarter. From The Verge on April 29th: Spotify is still losing money despite its subscriber growth. The company posted a loss of €142 million ($158.3 million) for the January to March quarter, compared with a loss of €169 million in the same period last year. Good information- This then prompts several important questions and observations: -First, the addition of MQA has not helped Tidal's numbers one iota, and other lossless services like Deezer and Qobuz clearly see this and have thankfully bypassed it. -How long can the streaming services aside from Apple continue to bleed like a stuck pig before the streaming industry collapses? The fact is the vast, VAST majority of music consumers do not want to pay for it, or they want to pay as little as possible. Unfortunately, there may be no solution for this. Link to comment
asdf1000 Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 1 hour ago, MikeyFresh said: Spotify still bleeds money every quarter. Previous quarter was profitable... https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/6/18214331/spotify-earnings-financial-announcement-profits-music-streaming-podcast That was their first ever and yes most recent quarter was another loss but as paid subscriber numbers continue to climb and their year on year losses get smaller, it's not rocket surgery to guess where they're heading... Link to comment
Popular Post Jud Posted June 11, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted June 11, 2019 23 minutes ago, Em2016 said: it's not rocket surgery Or brain science? lucretius and new_media 2 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 MikeyFresh Posted June 11, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted June 11, 2019 1 hour ago, Em2016 said: Previous quarter was profitable... https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/6/18214331/spotify-earnings-financial-announcement-profits-music-streaming-podcast That was their first ever and yes most recent quarter was another loss but as paid subscriber numbers continue to climb and their year on year losses get smaller, it's not rocket surgery to guess where they're heading... Point taken, but one quarter does not a company make. Further, creative bookkeeping or other one-time revenue events or revisions to previous results can skew any particular reporting period, which is why analysts often toss out any outliers entirely when considering the overall situation. I'm no finance expert, but I do know that Spotify's benefactors won't forever tolerate the loss of $150 million or so in a quarter unless they feel a final consolidation of the industry is imminent, and they will emerge as the victor. Every day that deep pocketed Apple Music more than nips at their heels, especially in the lucrative U.S. market, the prospects for Spotify dampen just a bit more. All that aside, and more on-topic here, what do you think all of that means for Tidal and their MQA bet? Or maybe Tidal owes MQA next to nothing, perhaps they are shrewd negotiators that realized long ago MQA needs them much more than they need MQA? I wouldn't doubt it, much like the record labels who were able to obtain an equity stake in MQA for next to nothing, after all, MQA needed the labels far worse than the labels needed MQA. Lastly, the poor artist/content creators... streaming hasn't exactly worked out super well for them either, is that too unsustainable, or is it just the reality of private equity powered big business (the labels) killing the goose that laid the golden egg? Teresa and crenca 1 1 Boycott HDtracks Boycott Lenbrook Boycott Warner Music Group Link to comment
asdf1000 Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 1 hour ago, Jud said: Or brain science? I loved when the late great Charles Hansen (RIP) used to say 'it's not rocket surgery' 😉 Jud 1 Link to comment
asdf1000 Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 33 minutes ago, MikeyFresh said: Point taken, but one quarter does not a company make. Noted and this is why I acknowledged that this was their only quarter of profit and not even their most recent (as you pointed) but I also emphasised their year on year losses continue to reduce, as their paid subscriber numbers continue to climb... Link to comment
Paul R Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 21 hours ago, kumakuma said: How do you reconcile this with Dennis''s post? Did you listen to the file he shared? I am on an iPad, which makes it a tiny bit difficult to get the zip file down. But I have no doubt that Dennis is right in what he says. But I do not think that he is saying much of anything that contradicts what I said either. Just asking for an example where the higher frequencies are audible. Not sure how to provide that, since I can not hear to 20khz. Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC. Robert A. Heinlein Link to comment
Paul R Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 22 hours ago, lucretius said: It's a problem that can be solved by a better DAC. In any case, up-sampling is all that would be needed -- no need for "musical" content above 22kHz. What do you believe makes a DAC better? Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC. Robert A. Heinlein Link to comment
Popular Post FredericV Posted June 11, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted June 11, 2019 While Dolby is much bigger than MQA, and Atmos is certainly not a failed format in the digital cinema world, Universal will be releasing their music upmixed to Atmos:https://www.whathifi.com/news/dolby-and-universal-partner-to-create-thousands-of-songs-in-atmos Why another format? What does this show us? They tried MQA, it failed, let's try something else then? esldude, lucretius and crenca 3 Designer of the 432 EVO music server and Linux specialist Discoverer of the independent open source sox based mqa playback method with optional one cycle postringing. Link to comment
kumakuma Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 57 minutes ago, Paul R said: I am on an iPad, which makes it a tiny bit difficult to get the zip file down. But I have no doubt that Dennis is right in what he says. But I do not think that he is saying much of anything that contradicts what I said either. Just asking for an example where the higher frequencies are audible. Not sure how to provide that, since I can not hear to 20khz. Dennis's method seems to offer a way to hear what's above 20kHz. It appears to involve use of a high-pass filter then slowing the tempo of the file down to bring the higher frequencies down into the audible range. That's unfortunate that you can't hear the file as it shows that there was nothing of interest above 20kHz in your needle drop, perhaps due to the instrument involved (piano) as @John_Atkinson said. Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley Through the middle of my skull 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